See related documentsElection observation report
| Doc. 13296
| 03 September 2013
Observation of the parliamentary elections in Albania (23 June 2013)
1. Introduction
1. Further to an invitation from the Speaker of the
Parliament of Albania, the Bureau of the Parliamentary Assembly,
at its meeting on 22 April 2013, decided to observe the parliamentary
elections in Albania on 23 June 2013, to constitute an ad hoc Committee
for this purpose, composed of 30 members and the two co-rapporteurs
of the Monitoring Committee, ex officio, and to authorise a pre-electoral
mission composed of seven members: one from each political group
and the two co-rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee.
2. On 26 April 2013, the Bureau of the Assembly approved the
composition of the ad hoc committee and appointed Mr Luca Volontè
as Chairperson.
3. On 4 October 2004, a co-operation agreement was signed between
the Parliamentary Assembly and the European Commission for Democracy
through Law (the Venice Commission). In pursuance of Article 15
of this Agreement, “when the Bureau of the Assembly decides to observe
an election in a country in which electoral legislation was previously
examined by the Venice Commission, one of the rapporteurs of the
Venice Commission on this issue may be invited to join the Assembly’s
election observation mission as legal adviser”, the Bureau of the
Assembly invited an expert from the Venice Commission to join the
ad hoc committee as an adviser.
4. The pre-electoral delegation, composed of Mr Luca Volontè
(Italy, EPP/CD), Ms Alina Stefania Gorghiu (Romania, ALDE), Mr Petros
Tatsopoulos (Greece, UEL) and the two co-rapporteurs of the Monitoring Committee,
Mr Jonathan Evans (United Kingdom, EDG) and Mr Grigore Petrenco
(Republic of Moldova, UEL), was present in Tirana on 11 and 12 June
2013 and met with the Prime Minister, the Speaker of the Parliament, the
Chairperson and members of the Central Electoral Committee (CEC),
the Minister of the Interior, representatives of parties running
in the elections, representatives of civil society and the media,
the observation mission of the Office for Democratic Institutions
and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Co-operation
in Europe (OSCE/ODIHR) and members of the diplomatic corps in Tirana.
The programme of the pre-electoral delegation appears in Appendix
2.
5. In a statement issued at the end of its mission, the pre-electoral
delegation concluded that “Albania needs the elections on the 23rd
of June to meet Council of Europe standards, in order to confirm
its genuine commitment to democracy, respect for the rule of law
and protection of human rights. All Albanian political parties must
show the will to restore people’s trust and confidence in the electoral
process, by ensuring that the conduct of the campaign and of the
voting itself is able to pave the way towards the acceptance of
the elections results by all stakeholders”. The statement appears
in Appendix 3.
6. The ad hoc committee observed the elections as part of the
International Election Observation Mission (IEOM), which also comprised
delegations from the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE (OSCE-PA)
and the Election Observation Mission conducted by the OSCE/ODIHR.
7. The ad hoc Committee met in Tirana from 21 to 24 June 2013
and met, among others, leaders and representatives of political
parties running in the elections, the Chairperson of the CEC, representatives
of civil society and the media, and members of the diplomatic corps
in Tirana. The programme of the delegation appears in Appendix 4
and the statement issued by the IEOM in Appendix 5.
8. A delegation of the European Parliament was present in Tirana
to assess the political situation on the occasion of the parliamentary
elections. On the initiative of the European Parliament delegation,
the Head of the Parliamentary Assembly’s ad hoc committee met the
European Parliament delegation and had an exchange of views on the
electoral process.
9. On election day, the delegation split into 11 teams which
observed the opening, voting and closing as well as the handing-over
of the ballot boxes in the Ballots Counting Centres (BCCs) in and
around Tirana, Kruje, Durres, Kavaja, Elbasan, Fier, Patos, Shkodra,
Lezhe and Kukes.
10. The IEOM concluded that the parliamentary elections were competitive,
with active citizen participation throughout the campaign and genuine
respect for fundamental freedoms. It noted, however, that the atmosphere
of mistrust between the two main political forces tainted the electoral
environment and challenged the administration of the entire electoral
process.
2. Political
context
11. The elections were characterised by a tense political
environment, resulting from long-standing conflicts between the
two parties which dominate the political arena: the Democratic Party
(DP) and the Socialist Party (SP). The previous parliamentary elections
were held in Albania in 2009. They resulted in near equal representation
of the governing coalition (led by the DP) and the opposition (led
by the SP), with 70 and 66 seats respectively. The four remaining
seats were won by the Socialist Movement for Integration (SMI),
which subsequently joined the DP-led coalition.
12. In March 2013, the SMI left the governing coalition. The parliament
then dismissed the SMI-proposed member of the Central Electoral
Commission and his place was taken by a representative of the Republican Party
(RP) from the governing coalition. This change in the composition
of the CEC was followed by the resignation of the three members
of the CEC that had been proposed by the SP-led coalition. The parliament did
not approve these three resignations, but the CEC was forced to
work de facto with a composition
of four instead of seven members.
13. The elections of 23 June 2013 were widely viewed as a crucial
test for Albania’s aspirations to European Union membership. The
challenge of organising elections in line with Council of Europe
standards was a particularly difficult one, given the long-standing
polarisation between the two main political forces, the DP (led by
Prime Minister Sali Berisha) and the SP (led by Edi Rama), and the
mistrust of other parties towards them.
14. Out of the 66 contending parties, 25 joined the DP-led Alliance
for Employment, Prosperity and Integration and 37 parties joined
the SP-led Alliance for European Albania. Four parties ran separately
and there were also two independent candidates.
3. Legal framework
15. The 140-member Parliament of Albania is elected for
a four-year term under a proportional system with 12 multi-member
electoral districts that correspond to the country’s administrative
regions. Political parties, coalitions and independent candidates
can contest the elections, with closed candidate lists submitted
by parties for each district. Parties that receive at least 3% and
coalitions that receive at least 5% of the valid votes in a district
qualify for seat allocation.
16. The main piece of legislation governing the elections is the
Electoral Code. Other pieces of relevant legislation include the
Constitution and the instructions and decisions of the CEC.
17. The current Electoral Code, adopted in December 2008, was
drafted by a bi-partisan committee and introduced provisions giving
the two largest political parties (currently the DP and the SP)
significant responsibilities at every stage of the electoral process,
including in administering the elections. As stated in the 2011
Joint Opinion of the Venice Commission and OSCE/ODIHR on the electoral
legislation, this led to an overly detailed code, “which could result
in challenges and even possible obstruction to the electoral process by
representatives of these two large parties”.
18. The parliamentary elections of 23 June 2013 were the second
parliamentary elections since the Electoral Code was adopted. The
code has been changed several times, the last time on 19 July 2012,
and important amendments have been introduced.
19. The July 2012 changes addressed several Venice Commission
and OSCE/ODIHR recommendations included in the 2011 joint opinion, inter alia the amendment of the
selection process for the election administration, including the
CEC chairperson, a revised process to compile voter lists, simplified
provisions for candidate registration and increased sanctions for
election-related violations. However, it should be stressed that
meaningful improvements in the conduct of democratic elections in
Albania cannot be made only through legislation, but require a change
in attitudes and practices of the main political groups and their
leaders.
20. The Criminal Code of Albania was amended in March 2012, establishing
new electoral offences and strengthening penalties for the already
existing ones.
21. However, some revisions of the Electoral Code weakened the
legal framework, including less strict enforcement mechanisms for
non-compliance with gender quotas for candidate lists and a more
lenient provision on the use of public servants for campaign purposes.
Many recommendations on crucial aspects remained unaddressed, including
measures to enhance the impartiality of election commissions, independent candidate
rights, campaign finance transparency, and effective electoral dispute
resolution.
22. Legislation did not adequately regulate or penalise the misuse
of administrative resources. The enforcement of provisions against
campaign misconduct, including vote buying, was weak. There was
a lack of regulation on the complaint resolution mechanism at the
level of Zone Election Commissions (CEAZ) and Vote Centre Commissions
(VCC), as the law was silent on this very important issue, stating
only that the complaints are “registered” by the secretaries of
these commissions.
23. Electoral stakeholders were not adequately provided with effective
legal remedies and due process to resolve election-related grievances.
In some cases, adjudicative bodies refused consideration of complaints
or exceeded their jurisdiction. Electoral subjects rarely used available
electoral dispute resolution mechanisms, including for a reported
lack of confidence in the election administration, courts and law
enforcement bodies.
4. Administration
of the elections
24. The parliamentary elections were administered by
a three-tiered system comprising the CEC, 89 commissions of electoral
administration zones (CEAZs) and 5 508 voting centre commissions
(VCCs). The counting took place in 89 ballot counting centres (BCCs),
one for each EAZ. Among these entities, only the CEC is a permanent
body.
25. Election commissions at all levels had seven members and were
composed of nominations from political parties based on their representation
in the parliament. The requirement to include at least 30% of each
gender in the overall CEAZ membership was fulfilled. There was no
gender requirement for VCCs and BCC teams.
26. As already mentioned, after the SMI joined the opposition
and left the ruling coalition in April 2013, the parliament recalled
one CEC member nominated by the SMI and replaced him with a representative
of the Republican Party, from the ruling coalition. This was done
in breach of Article 18 of the Electoral Code. In protest, three
members from the opposition (from the SP and from the Human Rights
Union Party (HRUP)) left the CEC, which was left to work with only
four members instead of seven. This situation was not resolved by the
political parties before election day, despite the fact that there
were some normative acts which required a qualified five-member
majority, including decisions concerning the approval of election
results in each constituency and the allocation of seats. In fact,
the CEC was prevented from regulating aspects of the electoral process
in a proper legal manner.
27. One example of a controversial decision of the CEC in terms
both of procedure and substance was the adoption of rules for the
drawing of lots for assigning the order of contestants on the ballot
paper. The decision required a qualified majority, but was decided
with only four votes. Furthermore, these rules were amended several
days later, allowing the CEC to change the order of parties on the
ballot paper after the drawing of lots, which represented a substantive
contravention of the Electoral Code.
28. In general, the technical preparations for the elections were
adequate, despite some shortcomings, such as not meeting a number
of legal deadlines. This happened even when the CEC still operated
with all its seven members. For example, the CEC failed to adopt
regulations necessary to supplement the Electoral Code, including
the requested approval of its internal rules of procedure 60 days
prior to election day. Regulations adopted for the last elections
were not amended to comply with the 2012 amendments to the Electoral
Code. The calling of sessions often came late (without respecting
the 24-hour notice period) and the publication of decisions was
incomplete on the CEC’s website. However, the sessions were public
and streamed online and parties and media were present at the sessions,
ensuring transparency.
29. The CEC provided training for election officials, but the
effectiveness of the training was limited due to late changes in
the lower-level commissions. The CEC also aired voter information
spots ahead of election day.
30. The CEAZs generally enjoyed the confidence of electoral stakeholders,
but a large number of them were split along political lines in their
decision making. The politicisation of the CEAZs was obvious: the
CEC replaced all members nominated by the HRUP in all CEAZs with
nominees of the RP and justified this decision by “the new circumstances
created in the composition of the groups of parliamentary majority
and opposition”. The Electoral Code provides an exhaustive list
of possible reasons for the early termination of the mandate of a
CEAZ member, but the list does not include the recomposition of
the parliament. However, political parties replaced a large number
of CEAZ members at will, and this until just several days prior
to election day, thus reducing the effectiveness of the training
provided by the CEC.
31. A number of voting centres (VCs) were situated in private
buildings, which remains a contested issue. The CEC relocated some
90 VCs on questionable legal grounds. Political parties submitted
nominations for the VCCs and BCC teams after legal deadlines and
requested changes of their nominees up until election day, which
was against the law in the case of the VCCs.
32. The CEC was tasked with conducting pilot tests of two new
election technologies: an electronic counting system in the Fier
District and an electronic voter verification system in the Tirana
district. Preparation for both pilots extended past legal deadlines,
making successful implementation impossible.
33. According to the CEC, 3 271 885 voters were included on the
voter lists, which had been extracted from the National Civil Status
Register maintained by the Ministry of the Interior. Mayors were
responsible for certifying the accuracy of the voter lists and they
were required to inform the CEC of the number of voters and the
location of the VCs. 139 local mayors were fined for failing to
do this. Some 20 VCs were established in prisons and detention centres.
34. There was overall confidence in the accuracy and quality of
voter lists. They were generally posted for public display and,
in addition, voters could check their details online.
35. The registration of the contestants was inclusive and offered
voters a genuine choice, as 66 political parties (out of which,
as mentioned, 62 were part of two coalitions led by the DP and the
SP respectively) and two independent candidates were registered.
The CEC initially registered 64 political parties and two independent
candidates and denied registration to six parties and five independent
candidates. All six parties appealed and two of them had their appeals
satisfied. The CEC approved all candidate lists with a total of
7 149 candidates, including 2 753 women.
36. According to the Electoral Code, candidates had to resign
from high-level public posts prior to registration. The Head of
the General Directorate for Prisons, who was a candidate on the
DP list in Tirana, resigned only on 19 June.
37. Each candidate list had to include at least one male and one
female in the top three positions and had to consist of at least
30% of each gender. Many parties included the requested quota of
women on their lists but at the bottom of the lists. The CEC issued
fines to the three largest parliamentary parties (DP, SP and SMI) for
failing to meet the quota in four, six and four districts respectively,
but the parties refused to modify their lists which, in the end,
were registered by the CEC as they stood.
5. The election campaign
and the media environment
38. The campaign was vibrant and overall peaceful. The
political parties developed programmatic platforms and engaged in
a substantive political debate. However, mutual accusations between
the DP and the SP often shifted attention away from the substance
of the campaign.
39. Contestants were able to campaign freely, accordingly to their
respective financial possibilities. The parliamentary parties, as
well as the New Democratic Spirit (NDS, the party led by former
President Bamir Topi), organised rallies and concerts and used banners
extensively. Smaller parties organised smaller-scale meetings and
distributed leaflets in targeted areas. All parties used social
media extensively.
40. Unfortunately, incidents of serious violence, possibly related
to the elections, were also reported: the attempted shooting of
a local DP chairperson in the region of Kukes, the detonation of
an explosive device outside the residence of a DP candidate in Vlore,
the beating of an NDS candidate in Fier and the beating of a VCC
member nominated by the SP in the region of Berat.
41. In contradiction with the Venice Commission’s Code of Good
Practice in Electoral Matters, during the campaign, there was a
continuous blurring between state institutions and party interests.
Although this was prohibited by law, the DP and the SP used public
vehicles and official buildings for campaign purposes. A number
of official government events were accompanied by DP campaign advertising
and speeches. The Prime Minister’s official site included campaign
coverage.
42. There were widespread allegations that public sector workers
were required by their superiors to attend rallies for the governing
party. Schools were sometimes closed during daytime rallies with
the teachers and students being present at the rallies. A strong
presence of schoolchildren was noted at many campaign events. The
SP claimed that their activists and supporters, including VCC members
from past elections or their family members, were dismissed from
public sector jobs on political grounds.
43. International observers were made aware of allegations of
vote buying, focussing in particular on the Roma and on poor communities
living in rural areas.
44. The Albanian legal framework did not provide for sufficient
transparency in campaign finance reporting as there were no disclosure
requirements before election day. This led to concerns that political
parties were spending over the legal limits.
45. The media environment was pluralistic and offered a diversity
of content, which allowed voters to make an informed choice. However,
editorial independence was hampered by political influence. The
Media Monitoring Board, charged with monitoring the media and proposing
administrative sanctions during the campaign, was established a
month after the legal deadline and failed to provide the CEC with
daily reports as legally required.
46. Women candidates received marginal news coverage.
47. On 3 June, the CEC adopted a controversial decision requiring
broadcasters to air pre-recorded material prepared by electoral
subjects in their newscasts, as such, without any editorial intervention.
This decision is inconsistent with Council of Europe standards and
Albania’s OSCE commitments, as it limits editorial freedom and viewers’
access to independent reporting. The People’s Advocate (Ombudsperson)
recommended that the CEC repeal its decision.
6. Polling day and
results
48. The start of the election day was tarnished by isolated
instances of violence, one of which ended tragically with the death
from gunshot wounds of one party supporter and severe injuries to
two others, including one candidate, outside a VC in Lac (Lezhe
District). With these extremely regrettable exceptions, the election
day generally took place in an orderly manner.
49. Due to the changes in the composition of the VCCs right up
until election day, those members of the VCCs who were nominated
late had not been trained, which induced confusion and often tensions
on election day, as the procedures were understood differently.
50. According to the statistics of the OSCE/ODIHR, based on the
observation of the more than 380 observers deployed, the opening
was assessed positively in 84% of the VCs observed and negatively
in 16%, which is significant. VCs were supposed to open at 7 a.m.
but there were delays in opening in 72% of the VCs observed, due
to lack of organisation, arguments over procedures, late arrival
of VCC members or missing material such as ink or ballots.
51. Voting was assessed as good or very good in 94% of the observed
VCs and bad in 6%. Only seven VCs out of 1 363 observed were assessed
as very bad. Indications of possible ballot-stuffing was observed
in three VCs. Proxy voting was observed in 5% of VCs. In 3% of VCs
the same persons were observed assisting different voters. Also
in 3% of VCs attempts to influence voters’ choice were observed.
Ink verification was not done consistently in 28% of VCs and multiple
voting was observed in 12 VCs. Family voting was observed in 14%
of VCs, and more frequently in rural areas. The large size of the
ballot papers, combined with the small size of the voting booths,
often compromised the secrecy of the voting, in particular in smaller
VCs. The overall assessment of voting was more negative in rural
areas (10%) than in urban areas (3%).
52. Observers of contestants were present in 89% of VCs and citizen
observers in 22% of VCs. Interference in the voting process by observers
of contestants (both from DP-led and SP-led coalitions) was observed
in 8% of the VCs.
53. The closing of the VC and the transfer of the materials to
the BCCs were observed in 93 cases and assessed as good or very
good in 79 cases and bad in 6 cases. There were issues due to uncertainty
over the procedures to follow. The process of reception of the materials
by the BCCs was transparent but sometimes affected by overcrowding.
In certain BCCs, counting teams were not yet established or were
still receiving training during the intake of the ballot boxes which
caused delays. Subsequent delays were noted in BCCs where counting
teams took extensive breaks. In some instances, observers were not
allowed to get close enough to the counting tables, which affected
transparency.
54. In statistical terms, the elections were assessed as being
“above average”.
55. The members of the Assembly’s ad hoc committee reported that,
in the areas in which they were deployed, voting took place in an
orderly manner. However, they observed a number of irregularities
and minor technical problems in the VCs they visited:
- failure to comply with the opening
hours;
- difficulties in finding the voting centres;
- cases of family voting, which put into question the principle
of the secrecy of voting;
- the large size of the ballot papers, combined with the
small size of the voting booths, often compromised the secrecy of
voting, in particular in smaller voting centres;
- one attempt to take photos of a ballot paper during the
voting procedure (the ballot was invalidated);
- poor knowledge of the voting procedures (members of the
VCCs could be changed up until election day leaving no time to train
the newly nominated members), leading to unintentional failure to
comply with procedures, including during the count, and especially
in rural areas;
- limited cases of interference of political party observers
in the running of the VCs, including during the counting;
- the issue of double subordination of members of VCCs to
their respective parties and to the higher election administration,
which created confusion in the reporting after the closing procedure;
- a general lack of authority of the CEC over the VCCs;
in one VC, the chairperson acted as if he were answerable to the
observers from political parties rather than the CEC;
- generally speaking, the polling stations did not provide
easy access for the disabled;
- observers of the contestants were given access to detailed
information on who had been voting and therefore they were able
to check who had voted and urge those who had not yet voted to do
so.
56. On 6 August, the CEC approved the final results of the 23
June parliamentary elections with four votes in favour. Thus, the
SP-led Alliance for European Albania gained the vote of 993 934
citizens, collecting 57.63% of the popular vote and gaining 83 seats
in the new Assembly (SP: 65, SMI: 16, HRUP: 1, Christian Democratic
Party: 1), whereas the DP-led Alliance for Employment, Prosperity
and Integration gained the vote of 680 677 citizens, collecting
39.46% of the popular vote and gaining 57 mandates (DP: 50, PJI:
4, RP: 3) in the new Assembly.
7. Conclusions
and recommendations
57. The Parliamentary Assembly ad hoc committee concluded
that the parliamentary elections of 23 June 2013 were competitive,
with active citizen participation throughout the campaign and genuine
respect for fundamental freedoms. It noted, however, that the atmosphere
of distrust between the two main political forces tainted the electoral
environment and challenged the administration of the entire electoral
process.
58. The legal framework provided a sound basis for the conduct
of democratic elections, but its implementation and enforcement
fell short in a number of respects, which affected public confidence
in the electoral process. In the future, the electoral legislation
must be implemented fully and in good faith.
59. The electoral campaign saw parties engaging in a substantive
political debate, but mutual accusations still represented too great
a part of the message given to voters. The continued blurring between
state institutions and party interests, combined with credible allegations
of vote buying and pressure on public sector employees, negatively
impacted on the pre-electoral environment and should be avoided
in the future.
60. Events such as the killing of a party supporter, which tarnished
the start of the election day, as well as the other instances of
violence noted during the electoral campaign period, are not compatible
with genuine democracy. Therefore, in the future, contestants in
elections must refrain from verbal violence, which, in the context
of a strong political polarisation, induces a climate of hate and
leads to tragedies.
61. On election day, voting proceeded relatively smoothly. However,
there were a series of procedural irregularities, which must be
addressed by the Albanian authorities in the future.
62. The functioning of the election administration during the
electoral process proved that party influence was extremely important
on structures which should be institutionally independent. The CEC
must be an impartial body, and it must be perceived as such in order
to gain authority over the electoral process and win citizens' trust.
Its vulnerability to pressures and its politicisation must come
to an end.
63. Media coverage of the electoral process was in general pluralistic
and offered a diversity of content, but editorial independence was
not entirely respected, as the CEC asked broadcasters to air campaign
material prepared by contestants in news programmes, without any
editorial comment.
64. In assessing the elections, it is important to consider the
election process as a whole and not to focus only on the election
day. This means that all the issues and shortcomings mentioned in
this report, regarding the general situation, must be addressed
in the future by the Albanian authorities.
65. In order to further reinforce the democratic process in Albania,
to restore and strengthen citizens' full trust in the electoral
process, the ad hoc committee calls on the Albanian authorities
to take,
inter alia, the following measure,
in close co‑operation with the Venice Commission:
- assess and improve the electoral
legal framework, by taking into consideration the issues identified during
the parliamentary elections of 23 June 2013, in the light of the
recommendations made by the Council of Europe's Venice Commission;
- make a clear distinction, both in the electoral legislation
and when implementing it, between the political parties' activities
and State institutions;
- guarantee the impartial and neutral functioning of the
election administration at all levels, by ensuring its genuine institutional
independence;
- reinforce the legal protection of persons working in the
election administration against any possible pressure from the State
or from political parties;
- organise better training for members of the voting centre
commissions, especially in rural areas, in order to increase their
knowledge of procedures.
66. The ad hoc committee believes that it would be appropriate
to consider preparing and implementing projects for Albania under
the Council of Europe's electoral assistance programmes, taking
into consideration the problems identified during these elections.
Appendix 1 – Composition
of the ad hoc committee
(open)
Based on proposals by the political groups
of the Assembly, the ad hoc committee was composed as follows:
– Luca VOLONTÈ,* Head of the Delegation, Italy (EPP/CD)
- Socialist
Group (SOC)
- Maryvonne
BLONDIN, France
- Florin IORDACHE, Romania
- Mogens JENSEN, Denmark
- Rytta MYLLER, Finland
- Dana VAHALOVA, Czech Republic
- Group of the European People's
Party (EPP/CD)
- Imer
ALIU, “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”
- Şaban DISLI, Turkey
- Renato FARINA, Italy
- Nermina KAPETANOVIĆ, Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Jan KAŹMIERCZEK, Poland
- Foteini PIPLI, Greece
- European Democrat Group (EDG)
- Vyacheslav TIMCHENKO, Russian
Federation
- Alliance of Liberals and Democrats
for Europe (ALDE)
- André
BUGNON, Switzerland
- Alina Ştefania GORGHIU,* Romania
- Tudor-Alexandru CHIUARIU, Romania
- Group of the United European
Left (UEL)
- Petros
TATSOPOULOS,* Greece
- Rapporteur of the Monitoring
Committee (ex officio)
- Grigore
PETRENCO,* Republic of Moldova
- Venice Commission
- Konrad OLSZEWSKI, expert of
the Venice Commission
- Secretariat
- Chemavon CHAHBAZIAN, Deputy
Head of Secretariat, Interparliamentary Co-operation and Election
Observation Division, Secretariat of the Parliamentary Assembly
- Bogdan TORCATORIU, Administrator, Interparliamentary Co-operation
and Election Observation Division, Secretariat of the Parliamentary
Assembly
- Amaya ÚBEDA DE TORRES, Administrator, Venice Commission
- Franck DAESCHLER, Principal Administrative Assistant,
Interparliamentary Co-operation and Election Observation Division,
Secretariat of the Parliamentary Assembly
- Anne GODFREY, Assistant, Interparliamentary Co-operation
and Election Observation Division, Secretariat of the Parliamentary
Assembly
* Pre-electoral mission (10-11 June 2013)
Appendix 2 – Programme of
the pre-electoral mission (10-11 June 2013)
(open)
10
June 2013
9:30-10:00 Delegation meeting
10:00-10:30 Meeting with Mr Marco Leidekker, Head of the
Council of Europe Office in Tirana
10:30-12:00 Meeting with Ms Conny McCormack, Head of the
OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission, and:
- Mr Harald Jepsen, Deputy Head of Mission
- Ms Aleška Simkić, political analyst
- Ms Marla Morry, legal analyst
- Mr Giuseppe Milazzo, media analyst
12:00-13:30 Meeting with members of the diplomatic corps in
Tirana:
- Ambassador Florian
Raunig, Embassy of Austria, representing the incoming Chairmanship
of the Council of Europe
- Ambassador Mads Sandau-Jensen, Embassy of Denmark
- Ambassador Leonidas Rokanas, Embassy of Greece
- Mr Giuseppe Berlendi, Deputy Head of Mission, Embassy
of Italy
- Ambassador Viorel Stanila, Embassy of Romania
- Ambassador Nicholas Cannon, Embassy of the United Kingdom
- Ambassador Ettore Sequi, Delegation of the European Union
to Albania
- Mr Robert Wilton, Deputy Head of the OSCE Presence in
Albania
14:30-15:30 Meeting with representatives of the civil society:
- NDI (Ms Ana Kovacevic, Mr Sam
Sager and Ms Dorarta Hyseni)
- Association for Democratic Culture (Ms Gerta Meta)
- Kriik Albania Association (Mr Premto Gogo)
- Association for Women and Children (Mr Rajmonda Prifti)
- Helsinki Committee (Ms Vjollca Mecaj)
15:30-16:30 Meeting with media representatives
- Mr Bledar Zaganjori, Top-Channel
- Mr Armand Shkullaku, ABC News
- Mr Robert Rakipllari, Panorama
- Mr Henri Çili, Mapo
- Mr Martin Leka, TVSH
- Ms Albana Basha, “Shqiptarja.com”
16:45-17:30 Meeting with Ms Lefterie Lleshi, Chairperson
of the Central Electoral Commission
17:45-18:30 Meeting with Mr Flamur Noka, Minister of the Interior
20:30 Working dinner hosted by Ms Jozefina Topalli Ҫoba,
Speaker of the Parliament
11 June 2013
10:00-12:30 Meetings with representatives of political parties:
- 10:00-10:25 Democratic Party
(DP)
- 10:25-10:50 Human Rights Union Party (HRUP)
- 10:50-11:15 Party for Justice and Integration (PJI)
- 11:15-11:40 Republican Party (RP)
- 11:40-12:05 Socialist Movement for Integration (SMI)
- 12:05-12:30 Socialist Party (SP)
14:00-14:50 Meetings with representatives of political parties:
- 14:00-14:25 New Democratic Spirit
(NDS)
- 14:30-14:55 Red and Black Alliance (RBA)
15:00-16:00 Meeting with Mr Sali Berisha, Prime Minister
16:30-18:00 Preparation of the press conference
18:30 Press conference
Appendix 3 – Statement by
the pre-electoral mission
(open)
Albania
needs 23 June elections to meet Council of Europe standards, says
PACE pre-electoral delegation
Strasbourg 11.06.2013 – “Albania needs the 23 June elections
to meet Council of Europe standards, in order to confirm its genuine
commitment to democracy, respect for the rule of law and protection
of human rights,” concluded a five-member pre-electoral delegation
of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), led
by Luca Volontè (Italy, EPP/CD), in a statement issued at the end
of a two-day visit to Tirana (10-11 June 2013).
All Albanian political parties must show the will to restore
people’s trust and confidence in the electoral process, by ensuring
that the conduct of the campaign and of the voting itself is able
to pave the way towards acceptance of the election result by all
stakeholders.
The delegation welcomed the adoption by the Parliament, in
2012, of a series of amendments to the Electoral Code, addressing
many of the concerns voiced by PACE, the Venice Commission and the
OSCE/ODIHR. However, the delegation stressed the need for the election
legislation to be implemented fully and in good faith during the
forthcoming elections, according to both its letter and its spirit.
The delegation noted that the campaign environment was generally
calm and peaceful. It regretted that the crisis over the composition
of the Central Election Committee (CEC) had not yet been resolved
and considered that, as long as the CEC was not perceived as being
impartial, the democratic conduct of the elections was endangered.
A generally-acceptable composition of the electoral administration,
multi-party and institutionally independent, was urgently needed.
Interlocutors of the delegation voiced concerns over allegations
of pressure on public sector workers coming from one party or another,
of extended vote-buying practices, of the disregard of gender-quota
requirements for the candidate lists, as well as of the lack of
transparency of the campaign financing. Also, the obligation for TV
channels to broadcast pre-recorded video material prepared by the
parties, as such, without any editorial comment, was seen by journalists
as a serious limitation of media freedom.
The delegation understood the difficulties in dealing in an
appropriate way with these concerns, given the short time left until
election day. However, it invites all the main political forces
to join efforts in order to increase the general confidence in the
elections and build public trust in their outcome. Clear evidence
has recently been shown within the Parliament that such co-operation
is possible and can be fruitful.
During its visit, the delegation met with the Prime Minister,
the Speaker of the Parliament, the Chairperson and members of the
CEC, the Minister of the Interior, representatives of the parties
running in the elections, representatives of civil society and the
media, the OSCE/ODIHR observation mission and members of the diplomatic
corps in Tirana.
A fully-fledged delegation from PACE will return to the country
to observe the voting before making a final assessment.
Appendix 4 – Programme of
the election observation mission (21-24 June 2013)
(open)
Friday,
21 June 2013
10:30-11:30
|
Meeting of the Parliamentary
Assembly delegation
|
13:30-14:00
|
Opening Remarks
- Mr Roberto Battelli, Special
Co-ordinator, Leader of the short-term OSCE observer mission
- Mr Luca Volontè, Head of the PACE Delegation
- Mr João Soares, Head of the OSCE PA Delegation
|
14:00-14:30
|
Remarks by the international
presence in Tirana
- Mr
Robert Wilton, Deputy Head of the OSCE Presence in Albania
- Ambassador Ettore Sequi, Head of Delegation of the European
Union to Albania
- Mr Marco Leidekker, Head of the Council of Europe Office
in Albania
|
14:30-15:30
|
Briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR
Election Observation Mission - Part I (Overview)
- Conny McCormack, Head of Mission
- Aleška Simkić, Political Analyst
- Marla Morry, Legal Analyst
- Giuseppe Milazzo, Media Analyst
|
15:45-16:45
|
Electoral Administration
- Central Election Commission
(CEC), Mr Skënder Vrioni, General Secretary
|
16:45-17:05
17:05-17:25
|
Meetings with political
parties running in the Alliance for Employment, Prosperity and Integration coalition
- Democratic Party, Mr Sali Berisha,
Chairperson
- Republican Party, Mr Fatmir Mediu, Chairperson, and Mr
Arjan Madhi, Vice Chairperson
|
17:25-17:45
17:45-18:05
|
Meetings with political
parties running outside of coalitions
- Red and Black Alliance, Mr Edmir
Dymleku, Secretary of Defense and National Security
|
Saturday,
22 June 2013
10:00-10:20
10:20-10:40
|
Meetings with political
parties running in the Alliance for the European Albania Coalition
- Socialist Party, Mr Damian Gjiknuri,
MP, Secretary for Electoral Issues and Mr Koli Bele, Vice Secretary
for Electoral Issues
- Socialist Movement for Integration, Mr Ilir Meta, Chairperson,
Mr Ralf Gjoni, International Secretary, and Mr Majlind Lazimi, Chief
of Staff
|
11:00-12:00
|
Meeting with civil society/NGO
representatives
- Coalition
of Domestic Observers, Ms Gerta Meta, Mr Premto Gogo and Ms Rajmonda
Prifti
- National Council of People with Disabilities, Mr Sinan
Tafaj
- Albanian Helsinki Committee, Ms Vjollca Meçaj
- NDI, Mr Sam Sager
|
12:00-13:00
|
Meeting with media representatives
- Lutfi Dervishi, Head of Information
Department at Vizion Plus TV
|
13:00-13:30
|
Briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR
Election Observation Mission - Part II (Observation forms and election day
procedures)
- Mr
Harald Jepsen, Deputy Head of Mission
- Mr Hans Schmeets, Statistical Analyst
|
13:30-14:00
|
Deployment of teams observing
in Tirana and the surroundings areas
- Distribution of the area-specific
briefing packs
- Area-specific briefing by the OSCE/ODIHR EOM LTO teams
6/7/8 (Tirana and surrounding areas) and distribution of the area-specific
briefing packs
Deployment of teams
observing outside Tirana and the surrounding areas
- Distribution of the area-specific
briefing packs
|
14:00
|
Meeting with interpreters
and drivers
|
Sunday,
23 June 2013
|
Observation of opening,
voting, vote count and tabulation of results
|
Monday,
24 June 2013
09:30-10: 30
|
Meeting of the PACE delegation
(debriefing)
|
17:00
|
Joint press conference
|
Appendix 5 – Statement by
the election observation mission
(open)
Albania’s
elections active and competitive, but mistrust between political
forces tainted the environment, international observers say
Strasbourg, 24.06.2013 – Albania’s parliamentary elections
on 23 June were competitive, with active citizen participation throughout
the campaign and genuine respect for fundamental freedoms. However,
the atmosphere of mistrust between the two main political forces
tainted the electoral environment and challenged the administration
of the entire electoral process, international observers said in
a statement today.
Persistent, long-standing differences and continued mutual
mistrust between the main political parties undercut the work of
the election administration, and the boycott of the Central Election
Commission by opposition parties following the controversial dismissal
of one of its members meant that it conducted the remainder of its work
without the quorum necessary to make key decisions, the statement
said.
“This was a substantive election offering voters real choices
at a critical time for Albania. It is now time for the country’s
political leaders to listen to the people’s verdict,” said Roberto
Battelli, the Special Co-ordinator who led the short-term OSCE observer
mission. “People were eager to express their will, and should not
be held hostage by politics. Politics are a crucial part of elections
but, in some ways, party politics have proven harmful, as they have
in the past.”
Extensive amendments to the Electoral Code in July 2012 improved
the electoral framework, which generally provides a sound basis
for the conduct of democratic elections. The observers noted, however,
that public confidence in the electoral process suffered because
implementation and enforcement fell short in a number of respects.
Sixty-six political parties – the majority of which joined
one of two electoral coalitions – and two independent candidates
were registered to stand in a largely inclusive process that offered
voters a choice. Parties developed programmatic platforms and engaged
in substantive political debates, but mutual accusations between
the two largest parties sometimes shifted attention away from the
substance of the campaign.
“Yesterday, the Albanians demonstrated their faith in the
democratic process and their hope for a European future. Now, it
is time for political leaders to show they deserve the trust placed
in them by respecting the results of the elections, by working together
with a sense of responsibility in the new parliament to improve
democratic standards and by dealing with economic and social challenges,”
said Luca Volontè (Italy, EPP/CD), the head of the delegation from
the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE). “Such
a sense of responsibility is vital in order for Albania to reach
its European goal and should be demonstrated not only over the next
few days during the counting process but throughout the coming years
of parliamentary and governmental efforts.”
On election day, voting proceeded relatively well, albeit
with some procedural irregularities. Closing procedures and the
receipt of ballot box at counting centres were assessed more positively.
Counting was delayed in many areas due to the late appointment of
counting officials.
“Albania is fortunate to have strong political forces that
have presented alternative visions for this country, but by not
appointing officials to promptly count the ballots, political parties
are unnecessarily making their voters wait for the results of these
elections,” said João Soares, the Head of the OSCE Parliamentary
Assembly delegation. “This is not fair to the voters or to Albanian
democracy.”
The large presence of citizen and contestant observers throughout
the day generally enhanced transparency, although partisan observers
were noted interfering in the process in some cases, the statement
said. The killing of a party supporter in Lac and other isolated
instances of violence tarnished the start of the elections.
The statement notes instances where public resources were
used for campaign purposes and that a number of official government
events included campaign advertising and speeches by the governing
party. Allegations of vote-buying and pressure on public-sector
employees negatively affected the pre-election environment. Campaign-financing
regulations did not provide for sufficient transparency.
The media environment was pluralistic and offered a diversity
of content, providing voters with the opportunity to make an informed
choice, monitoring over the course of the campaign found. Editorial
independence was hampered, however, by political influence. While
the public broadcaster granted the larger parties equitable news
coverage, the monitoring identified a more positive tone towards
the ruling party. Women candidates received marginal coverage, reflecting
continuing issues with women’s participation in political life.
Effective legal remedy and due process to resolve election-related
complaints were not adequately provided, and adjudicating bodies
refused to consider complaints or exceeded their jurisdiction in
key cases. Contestants rarely submitted complaints to be resolved
by the relevant bodies.
“Voters have a right to expect elections that are administered
professionally and impartially,” said Conny McCormack, the Head
of the OSCE/ODIHR long-term election observation mission. “During
our observation over the past six weeks we have seen politics permeate
election administration at all levels. While the voting on election
day was assessed positively, our overall findings are preliminary,
as much of the counting continues. The ODIHR mission will remain
in country to observe the remaining stages of the process.”