Final Report of 2016 Parliamentary Elections Monitoring Program
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
INTERNATIONAL ELECTION OBSERVATION MISSION Georgia — Municipal Elections, 30 May 2010
INTERNATIONAL ELECTION OBSERVATION MISSION Georgia — Municipal Elections, 30 May 2010 STATEMENT OF PRELIMINARY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS The 30 May municipal elections marked evident progress towards meeting OSCE and Council of Europe commitments. However, significant remaining shortcomings include deficiencies in the legal framework, its implementation, an uneven playing field, and isolated cases of election-day fraud. The authorities and the election administration made clear efforts to pro-actively address problems. Nevertheless, the low level of public confidence persisted. Further efforts in resolutely tackling recurring misconduct are required in order to consolidate the progress and enhance public trust before the next national elections. While the elections were overall well administered, systemic irregularities on election day were noted, as in past elections, in particular in Kakheti, Samtskhe-Javakheti and Shida Kartli. The election administration managed these elections in a professional, transparent and inclusive manner. The new Central Election Commission (CEC) chairperson tried to reach consensus among CEC members, including those nominated by political parties, on all issues. For the first time, Precinct Election Commission (PEC) secretaries were elected by opposition-appointed PEC members, which was welcomed by opposition parties and increased inclusiveness. The transparency of the electoral process was enhanced by a large number of domestic observers. Considerable efforts were made to improve the quality of voters’ lists. In the run-up to these elections, parties received state funding to audit the lists. Voters were given sufficient time and information to check their entries. As part of the recent UEC amendments, some restrictions were placed on the rights of certain categories of citizens to vote in municipal elections, in order to address opposition parties’ concerns of possible electoral malpractices. -
Pre-Election Monitoring of October 8, 2016 Parliamentary Elections Second Interim Report July 17 - August 8
International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy Pre-Election Monitoring of October 8, 2016 Parliamentary Elections Second Interim Report July 17 - August 8 Publishing this report is made possible by the generous support of the American people, through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). The views expressed in this report belong solely to ISFED and may not necessarily reflect the views of the USAID, the United States Government and the NED. 1. Introduction The International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED) has been monitoring October 8, 2016 elections of the Parliament of Georgia and Ajara Supreme Council since July 1, with support from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). The present report covers the period from July 18 to August 8, 2016. 2. Key Findings Compared to the previous reporting period, campaigning by political parties and candidates has become more intense. ISFED long-term observers (LTOs) monitored a total of 114 meetings of electoral subjects with voters throughout Georgia, from July 18 through August 7. As the election campaigning moved into a more active phase, the number of election violations grew considerably. Failure of relevant authorities to take adequate actions in response to these violations may pose a threat to free and fair electoral environment. During the reporting period ISFED found 4 instances of intimidation/harassment based on political affiliation, 2 cases of physical violence, 3 cases of possible vote buying, 4 cases of campaigning by unauthorized persons, 8 cases of misuse of administrative resources, 4 cases of interference with pre- election campaigning, 4 cases of use of hate speech, 7 cases of local self-governments making changes in budgets for social and infrastructure projects; 3 cases of misconduct by election commission members. -
Country of Origin Information Report Republic of Georgia 25 November
REPUBLIC OF GEORGIA COUNTRY OF ORIGIN INFORMATION (COI) REPORT Country of Origin Information Service 25 November 2010 GEORGIA 25 NOVEMBER 2010 Contents Preface Paragraphs Background Information 1. GEOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................ 1.01 Maps ...................................................................................................................... 1.05 2. ECONOMY ................................................................................................................ 2.01 3. HISTORY .................................................................................................................. 3.01 Post-communist Georgia, 1990-2003.................................................................. 3.02 Political developments, 2003-2007...................................................................... 3.03 Elections of 2008 .................................................................................................. 3.05 Presidential election, January 2008 ................................................................... 3.05 Parliamentary election, May 2008 ...................................................................... 3.06 Armed conflict with Russia, August 2008 .......................................................... 3.09 Developments following the 2008 armed conflict.............................................. 3.10 4. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS .......................................................................................... -
The Relevance of the Actual Values of the Political Actors of Georgia with the Ideologies Declared by Them
The Relevance of the Actual Values of the Political Actors of Georgia with the Ideologies Declared by Them Dr. Maia Urushadze1, Dr. Tamar Kiknadze2 1Caucasus International University 2Head of the Doctoral Program in Political Science, Caucasus International University Abstract The permanent ideological impact of the propaganda narratives of powerful political entities on the international community is perceived as one of the most important challenges of the 21st century. The international agenda is full of controversial interpretations, produced by powerful international political actors. As a result, the international media agenda is getting like the battlespace for the struggle of interpretations, where the ruthless kind of "frame-games" between the strongest global agenda-setting political entities takes place. The information field is open for all countries, including the small states, where political parties are not strong enough to have their propaganda to resist the ideological pressure from outside. Due to this, the societies of these countries are still easily influenced by the narratives of global political actors creating a suitable psychological environment for internal conflicts in societies. We consider Georgia among these states. Therefore, our research aimed to study the relevance of the actual values of local (Georgian) political actors with the ideologies declared by them. In this regard, our primary objective was to understand the specifics of strategic communication of local political actors, then, to compare their narratives with the rhetoric of international actors, and finally, to determine the strength of local society's resistance to these narratives. We hope that in this way we can assess the long-term impact of global actors’ propaganda communication could have on a small country. -
Pre-Election Media Monitoring, Interim Report
PRE-ELECTION MEDIA MONITORING INTERIM REPORT მედიის განვითარების ფონდი MEDIA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION 1 APRIL - 31 JULY, 2016 Authors: TAMAR KHORBALADZE Peer review: JEAN MARIE COAT, FPU Expert Researchers: TAMAR GAGNIASHVILI, SOPHO GOGADZE, KHATIA LOMIDZE, ROMAN BAINDURASHVILI, TAMAR SOPROMADZE, TINA GOGOLADZE, IRAKLI TSKHADADZE, MARIAM TSUTSKIRIDZE, NATIA GOGELIA, NATIA GOGOLASHVILI, DALI KURDADZE Editor: TAMAR KINTSURASHVILI Designed by BESIK DANELIA / IBDesign The report is prepared by Media Development Foundation (MDF) in the framework of the project “Transparent and Accountable Media for Enhancing Democratic Practices during Elections” supported by the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Georgia. The contents of this report is the sole responsibility of the MDF and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Embassy. ©2016, MEDIA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION MDFGEORGIA.GE MEDIAMETER.GE/GE Media Development Foundation (MDF) is conducting a pre-election media monitoring from April 1 to October 31, 2016. The monitoring is carried out with the financial support of the Embassy of the Kingdom of Netherlands in Georgia within the frame of the project Transparent and Accountable Media for Enhancing Democratic Practices during Elections. The aim of the project is to study how political subjects are represented in qualitative and quantitative terms in primetime news programs of TV channels and in online media; to clarify whether media provides citizens with relevant information to help them make an informed choice. The aim of the project also is to reveal essential problems through publicizing the findings of the research and attract citizens‟ attention to the reliability of their sources. The methodology for MDF‟s monitoring was developed by Dominique Thierry, consultant of Free Press Unlimited (FPU). -
Tamar Orjonikidze Georgian Diaspora and Current Diaspora Policy In
Tamar Orjonikidze I. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University Ph.D candidate in political sciences Georgian Diaspora and Current Diaspora Policy in Georgia Abstract Apart from historical diasporas, over million Georgian citizens reside abroad these days. Majority of them who went abroad in search of jobs should be considered migrants. Diaspora has great importance both for their families and Georgian economy. Therefore, Georgia needs to have a well-considered diaspora policy in place. Studying the interest spheres of diaspora members, their problems, the ways of strengthening their links with Georgia and developing the relevant policy is the biggest challenge for Georgian political parties, especially for the ruling party, which is responsible for carrying out the adequate diaspora policy. In this article we will try to look at the present day diaspora policy for which purpose we will discuss “2016-2020 Migration Strategy of Georgia”, the document developed by the ruling party (“Georgian Dream”) and carry out content analysis of 2016 election platform on diaspora of the above party and make comparisons. Key words: Georgia; Georgian diaspora; Diaspora policy. Introduction Unfortunately, the State Minister’s Office on Diaspora Issues does not have any accurate data on the number of citizens of the present day Georgian diaspora, since, on their explanation, the majority of our compatriots reside abroad illegally; consequently, they are not registered with the Consular Record Division. Besides, the intensiveness of movement from country to country is rather high. Although there are no exact data on the number of Georgian citizens residing outside the country, the fact is that this figure is quite high. -
Monitoring of Media Content of Local/Regional Television Broadcasters During Pre-Elections
Monitoring of Media Content of Local/Regional Television Broadcasters during Pre-Elections Subagreement # S-12-155 Report for: July 2 - November 11, 2012 Project Period: 11 June 2012 - 10 December 2012 Total Budget: 31 000$ Monitoring of Media Content of Local/Regional Television Broadcasters Results Summary/Impact Statement Main findings of monitoring: • Very few of the monitored subjects were dedicated airtime on regional TV channels; • Out of the monitored subjects the activities carried out by five political unions including United National Movement (UNM), Georgian Dream coalition, New Rights, Christian- Democratic Movement and Free Georgia were dedicated airtime; • Following the official announcement of the election campaign the amount of reporting on the UNM and the GD activities considerably went up; • In the aftermath of elections political parties were virtually provided with no TV coverage, apart from UNM and the Georgian Dream coalition; The amount of airtime devoted to the aforementioned two monitored subjects gradually decreased; • Most of the TV stories implied superficial information about the activities of the monitored subjects and failed to demonstrate dissenting or criticizing opinions over the issue; • In the aftermath of elections the extent of subjective coverage of events went down; • Following the elections some of the TV Companies mostly reported on social, cultural and economic issues ongoing in the region rather than political developments; • Prior to the elections the greater majority of regional TV channels dedicated a fair amount of airtime to reporting on the activities carried out by the local self-government. Reporting was almost always positive in tone. During the pre-election period reporting on the activities carried out by the local self-government considerably went up but this time reporting was not solely positive in tone; • The programs initiated by the authorities were covered in a superficial manner, without providing any additional arguments; • In the greater majority of TV Companies reporting was positive in tone. -
Intra-Party Democracy in the Georgian Political System
INTRA-PARTY DEMOCRACY IN THE GEORGIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM BAKUR KVASHILAVA eecmd.org INTRA-PARTY DEMOCRACY IN DEMOCRACY INTRA-PARTY THE GEORGIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM THE GEORGIAN POLITICAL The publication was commissioned by the Eastern European Centre for Multiparty Democ- racy (EECMD) as part of the Enhancing Institutional and Electoral Capacities of Democratic Political Parties project funded by the Danish Institute for Parties and Democracy (DIPD). The author is responsible for the content of this publication, and the opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect the views of the EECMD and DIPD. eecmd.org CONTENT 01 INTRODUCTION 05 METHODOLOGY 09 RESEARCH FINDINGS APPENDIX eecmd.org 21 INTRODUCTION Political parties play a significant role in the modern state. It is difficult to imagine running a country without them. There are still countries where no political parties exist; however, these are exceptions to the norm. Without political parties, it is difficult for the government of any 1 country to solve the complex and diverse issues that the modern state is responsible for solv- ing. Foreign policy, economics, social security, education, environmental protection, public development, law enforcement – this is just a small and general list of functions performed by a state in the modern world. When political parties do not function, we are dealing either with a government based on antiquated principles or with a microstate with a population of less than 20,000. Political parties are an integral part of modern reality and perform their functions not only in democratic nations but also even in authoritarian regimes. INTRA-PARTY DEMOCRACY IN DEMOCRACY INTRA-PARTY THE GEORGIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM THE GEORGIAN POLITICAL Naturally, political parties have a special role to play in a democratic system as the optimal means of gaining power. -
CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 89, 15 November 2016 2
No. 89 15 November 2016 Abkhazia South Ossetia caucasus Adjara analytical digest Nagorno- Karabakh www.laender-analysen.de/cad www.css.ethz.ch/en/publications/cad.html PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS IN GEORGIA Special Editor: Tatia Chikhladze, Research Centre for East European Studies at the University of Bremen ■■Undecided Voters in 2016: Leaning Towards a Multi-Party System? 2 Tamar Iakobidze, Tbilisi ■■Georgia’s Parliamentary Elections—a Step Forward? 6 Tornike Zurabashvili, Tbilisi ■■Implication of Increased Anti-Western Propaganda in the Election Results 10 Teona Turashvili, Tbilisi ■■DOCUMENTATION The Results of the Georgian Parliamentary Elections 14 This publication has been produced within the Innovative Training Network “Caspian” which is funded by an MSCA grant of the European Union in the context of Horizon 2020 (Grant agreement no: 642709). This publication reflects only the authors’ views. The funding body is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. Research Centre Center Caucasus Research German Association for for East European Studies for Security Studies Resource Centers East European Studies University of Bremen ETH Zurich CAUCASUS ANALYTICAL DIGEST No. 89, 15 November 2016 2 Undecided Voters in 2016: Leaning Towards a Multi-Party System? Tamar Iakobidze, Tbilisi Abstract The Georgian political party system has been marked by radical polarization between the Georgian Dream (GD) and the United National Movement (UNM) since 2012. However, the Parliamentary Elections in 2016 have shown growing indecision among voters, which indicates dissatisfaction with both GD and UNM as well as the need for a third alternative. Examining the profile of undecided voters and their behavior dur- ing the 2016 October elections gives insight into the prospects of a multi-party system in Georgia. -
Georgia's Parliamentary Election: the Final Report of IRI's Long-Term
GEORGIA'S PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION OCTOBER 8 AND OCTOBER 30, 2016 The Final Report of IRI’s Long-Term Observation Mission GEORGIA'S PARLIAMENTARY ELECTION OCTOBER 8 AND OCTOBER 30, 2016 The Final Report of IRI’s Long-Term Observation Mission December 2016 International Republican Institute www.IRI.org | @IRIGlobal © 2016 All Rights Reserved Georgia Parliamentary Election Report Copyright © 2016 International Republican Institute. All rights reserved. Permission Statement: No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system without the written permission of the International Republican Institute. Requests for permission should include the following information: • The title of the document for which permission to copy material is desired. • A description of the material for which permission to copy is desired. • The purpose for which the copied material will be used and the manner in which it will be used. • Your name, title, company or organization name, telephone number, fax number, e-mail address and mailing address. Please send all requests for permission to: Attention Communications Department International Republican Institute 1225 Eye Street NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20005 [email protected] Disclaimer: This publication was made possible through the support provided by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily -
The Pre-Election Environment in Georgia
The Pre-Election Environment in Georgia A report by the International Republican Institute’s Long-Term Election Observation Mission The Pre-Election Environment in Georgia August 1 – August 25, 2016 International Republican Institute www.IRI.org | @IRIGlobal © 2014 All Rights Reserved The Pre-Election Environment in Georgia Copyright © 2016 International Republican Institute. All rights reserved. Permission Statement: No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system without the written permission of the International Republican Institute. Requests for permission should include the following information: • The title of the document for which permission to copy material is desired. • A description of the material for which permission to copy is desired. • The purpose for which the copied material will be used and the manner in which it will be used. • Your name, title, company or organization name, telephone number, fax number, e-mail address and mailing address. Please send all requests for permission to: Attention Communications Department International Republican Institute 1225 Eye Street NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20005 [email protected] Disclaimer: This publication was made possible through the support provided by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID. Introduction On August 1, as part of its long-term election observation mission (LTO) to Georgia, the International Republican Institute (IRI) deployed seven long-term observation teams to Ajara, Samegrelo, Imereti, Samtskhe-Javakheti, Kvemo-Kartli and Kakheti.1 This report describes the findings of IRI’s long-term observation efforts from August 1 – August 25, and provides recommendations designed to increase public confidence in the electoral process. -
Municipal Elections, 30 May 2010
INTERNATIONAL ELECTION OBSERVATION MISSION Georgia — Municipal Elections, 30 May 2010 S TATEMENT OF P RELIMINARY F INDINGS AND C ONCLUSIONS P RELIMINARY C ONCLUSIONS The 30 May municipal elections marked evident progress towards meeting OSCE and Council of Europe commitments. However, significant remaining shortcomings include deficiencies in the legal framework, its implementation, an uneven playing field, and isolated cases of election-day fraud. The authorities and the election administration made clear efforts to pro-actively address problems. Nevertheless, the low level of public confidence persisted. Further efforts in resolutely tackling recurring misconduct are required in order to consolidate the progress and enhance public trust before the next national elections. While the elections were overall well administered, systemic irregularities on election day were noted, as in past elections, in particular in Kakheti, Samtskhe-Javakheti and Shida Kartli. The election administration managedthese elections in a professional, transparent and inclusive manner. The new Central Election Commission (CEC) chairperson tried to reach consensus among CEC members, including those nominated by political parties, on all issues. For the first time, Precinct Election Commission (PEC) secretaries were elected by opposition-appointed PEC members, which was welcomed by opposition parties and increased inclusiveness. The transparency of the electoral process was enhanced by a large number of domestic observers. Considerable efforts were made to improve the quality of voters’ lists. In the run-up to these elections, parties received state funding to audit the lists. Voters were given sufficient time and information to check their entries. As part of the recent UEC amendments, some restrictions were placed on the rights of certain categories of citizens to vote in municipal elections, in order to address opposition parties’ concerns of possible electoral malpractices.