Timing and Sequencing of Transitional Elections: Case studies Appendix to International IDEA’s Policy Paper No. 18 Timing and Sequencing of Transitional Elections: Case studies Appendix to International IDEA’s Policy Paper No. 18 Editors: Sead Alihodžić, Nicholas Matatu and Alexandre Raffoul © 2019 International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance International IDEA publications are independent of specific national or political interest. Views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the views of International IDEA, its Board or its Council members. The electronic version of this publication is available under a Creative Commons Attribute-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence. You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the publication as well as to remix and adapt it, provided it is only for non-commercial purposes, that you appropriately attribute the publication, and that you distribute it under an identical licence. For more information on this licence visit the Creative Commons website: <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/>. International IDEA Strömsborg SE–103 34 Stockholm Sweden Telephone: +46 8 698 37 00 Email: [email protected] Website: <http://www.idea.int> Design and layout: International IDEA Created with Booktype: <https://www.booktype.pro> International IDEA Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 5 1. Transitional elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1996–2002 .......................................... 6 2. Post-conflict transition and special autonomy in Bougainville, 2000–2017 ................... 15 3. Timing and sequencing of transitional elections: the case of Burkina Faso, 2014–2015 23. 4. Transitional elections in the Central African Republic, 2013–2016 .................................. 32 5. The 2016 post-conflict plebiscite in Colombia .................................................................... 41 6. Elections in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, 2014–2016 ............................ 47 7. Elections in Haiti (1987–2017) and prospects for modernizing the electoral system .... 56 8. General elections in Lesotho, 1965–2017 ............................................................................ 65 9. Post-conflict elections in Liberia, 1997 and 2005 ............................................................... 72 10. The 2013 elections in Madagascar ...................................................................................... 80 11. Transitional elections in Myanmar, 1990–2017 ................................................................. 89 12. Nepal’s 2008 Constituent Assembly elections .................................................................. 97 13. Post-conflict elections in Northern Ireland, 1994–2003 ................................................. 107 14. Transition in Tunisia (2011–2014) and prospects for consolidation ............................. 118 15. Venezuela (2013–2018): using timing and sequencing of elections to de- democratize ............................................................................................................................... 125 About the authors ..................................................................................................................... 133 About International IDEA .......................................................................................................... 138 Introduction Introduction The conduct of elections has been a central pillar in contemporary strategies to build and restore democratic government after armed conflicts, authoritarian rule and deep political crises. There is a growing recognition that hastily held or long-delayed elections can have undemocratic outcomes, deepen divisions and undermine peace. Increasing attention is therefore paid to decision-making processes, with a view of understanding circumstances that lead to appropriate timing and sequencing of transitional elections. International IDEA’s project on the ‘Timing and Sequencing of Transitional Elections’ is designed to assist key national and international stakeholders—who have an interest and often specific mandates to engage in these processes—to design constructive processes that favour well-informed and context-sensitive choices, and hence improve the chances of democratic development and consolidation. The key project output includes a thematic policy paper that derives from high-level discussions, involving international organizations and prominent national stakeholders, as well as the 15 case studies. The case studies provide insight on how stakeholders and decision-makers in a given transitional context have taken decisions regarding the timing and sequencing of elections, what factors influenced their decision and what are the effects of different choices. Given the unique perspectives, wealth of practical details, and comparative perspectives that these case studies bring, International IDEA has decided to edit and publish them in the form of a separate publication. The policy paper categorizes the case studies according to three transitional contexts, in order to compare and contrast key considerations that inform decision-making on electoral timing and sequencing. The three typical transitional contexts are: (a) countries where elections are organized to elect a democratic government following a period of authoritarian or semi-authoritarian rule; (b) countries where an election is used as an instrument for resolving deep political crises; and (c) countries where an election is part of a peace settlement to end violent conflict. International IDEA 5 Timing and Sequencing of Transitional Elections: Case studies 1. Transitional elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1996–2002 Dr Irena Hadžiabdić 1.1. Introduction Before renewing its independence in 1992, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) was one of six republics of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY). Following the death of the Yugoslav President Josip Broz Tito in 1980, economic reforms had been initiated but did not result in the expected outcome. The one-party system through which the Communist Party had monopolized power for more than 40 years could not respond to ever-louder popular demands for democratic change. Significant constitutional reforms were undertaken in the then Socialist Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina in July 1990. The adoption of 31 amendments to the Constitution opened the door to the formation of a multiparty system, the first multiparty elections on 18 November 1990, and the overall democratization of society. The 1990 elections resulted in a power-sharing arrangement between three ethnic political parties whose vote share largely reflected the ethnic composition of the population. Disagreements on key issues prevented these parties from reaching agreement on a common BiH position regarding the unfolding fragmentation of SFRY and the ensuing crisis. In response to this crisis the European Community adopted the Declaration on Yugoslavia (European Community 1991), inviting all Yugoslav republics to declare their intention to pursue independence and establishing the main criteria for their recognition. Among the criteria for the independence of BiH, the Conference on Yugoslavia (held in Paris in January 1992) suggested ‘a referendum of all citizens without distinction carried out under international supervision’. The referendum was held on 29 February and 1 March 1992, with a total of 99.44 per cent of those who voted approving the establishment of a sovereign and independent BiH, which granted equal status to members of the various groups (Muslims, Serbs and Croats) living in the Republic (Official Gazette of BiH 1992). On 6 April 1992 the European Community recognized BiH as a sovereign and independent state within its existing borders. As an international subject, BiH became a member of the United Nations on 22 May 1992. However, Serbs had 6 International IDEA 1. Transitional elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1996–2002 largely boycotted the referendum and did not recognize the independence of BiH, which ultimately resulted in war, lasting from 1992 to 1995. The international community played a central role in the negotiation process leading to the termination of this conflict in 1995, as well as in the consequent peace- and state-building processes. International engagement in the organization and conduct of elections was an essential component of this. 1.2. Context analysis The General Framework Agreement for Peace in BiH (Dayton Peace Agreement, DPA) that ended the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina was initiated in Dayton on 21 November 1995 and signed in Paris on 14 December 1995. It was primarily the result of the politico-military engagement of the international community. The DPA contains 11 annexes, including Annex 3 in which the signatories committed to the conduct of democratic elections, and Annex 4 which constitutes the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Annex 3 defined the role of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in the implementation and financing of elections on behalf of the international community. It also stressed the necessity of ensuring a politically neutral environment for the conduct of elections, and affirmed voters’ right to ballot secrecy and freedom from fear and intimidation alongside other civil and political rights (the freedoms of expression, press, association,