- IDOM - MOLDOVAN HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTE FINAL REPORT REGARDING THE IMLPEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT ON MONITORING OF THE COMPILATION AND VERIFICATION OF THE ELECTORAL ROLLS FOR THE 29 JULY 2009 EARLY ELECTIONS THE REPORT IS ISSUES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE MONITORING PROJECT FINANCED BY THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE AND THE UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM/EU This material has been produced within the pre-electoral assistance support to Moldova, funded by the Council of Europe. The contents of this material are the sole responsibility of the Moldovan Institute of Human Rights and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the Council of Europe. This material has been produced within the Electoral Support to Moldova Project, funded by the European Union, co-funded and implemented by the United Nations Development Programme. The contents of this material are the sole responsibility of the IDOM and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union and UNDP. CHIŞINĂU – July 24, 2009 – Page 1 of 85 FINAL REPORT REGARDING THE IMLPEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT ON MONITORING OF THE COMPILATION AND VERIFICATION OF THE ELECTORAL ROLLS FOR THE 29 JULY 2009 EARLY ELECTIONS Executive Summary (first phase: June 27 – July 6, phases two and three: July 6 -16, 2009) The subject of the electoral rolls, of their comLPete and correct compilation, was one of the major concerns expressed by a series of NGOs, mass media and political parties from the Republic of Moldova, after the parliamentary elections of April 5. To clarify the advancement and the quality of these processes in terms related to the early elections of July 29, 2009, the Moldovan Institute for Human Rights (IDOM) imLPemented a project on electoral rolls compilation and verification. Sixty one observers of the organisation were present in 33 Local Public Administrations (LPA) from the Republic of Moldova, following their activities, as well as their interaction with the electoral structures, with the aim of compiling of an electoral roll that was supposed to reduce the worries about its quality, expressed after April 5 elections. Reuse of April 5 rolls – a controversial matter: In the first phase of the project (June 27 – July 6, 2009) IDOM monitored the compilation of the electoral rolls by the LPAs. The situation in the following localities was monitored: - Two Municipalities: 1. Chişinău 2. Bălţi - Eight Districts: 1. Soroca (Soroca town and villages of Voloviţa, Stoicani, Căinarii Vechi) 2. Ştefan Vodă (Ştefan Vodă town and villages of Popeasca, Antoneşti, Carahasani) 3. Nisporeni (Nisporeni town and villages of Soltăneşti, Bălăureni, Bărboieni) 4. Drochia (Drochia town and villages of Chetrosu, Ţarigrad, Sofia) 5. Cahul (Cahul town and villages of Pelinei, Crihana Veche, Larga) 6. Hînceşti (Hînceşti town and villages of Lăpuşna, Stolniceni, Minjir) 7. Taraclia (Taraclia town and villages of Albota de Jos, Cairaclia) 8. Dubăsari – only villages of Coşniţa, Doroţcaia, Pîrîta (from Transnistrian region controlled by the central public administration) - As well as one village from the Găgăuz Autonomy (for comparison) 1. Copceac village IDOM observers followed the activities of the LPA, as well as interviewed public servants from those administrations, to evaluate if they use the April 5 lists (essentially compiled on the basis of the information provided by the Ministry of Information Development (further on - MID)). The rolls prepared for April 2009 elections were often considered to be excessively big/inflated, to the proportion of the demographic situation in the country. An eventual growth of the electoral rolls compiled for the summer early election, would have increase the number of questions regarding the quality of the electoral rolls. In this respect, the reuse of the April 5 rolls presented, from the outset, a controversial subject. Page 2 of 85 The Early Findings Report presented by IDOM on July 17, 2009, established that out of 33 monitored localities, only three did not use the April 5 rolls (Soroca town, in Albota de Jos village from Taraclia District and in Pîrîta village from Dubăsari District). In the rest of localities the April 5 rolls were used. In other words, the rolls formed on the basis of the data sent by the Ministry of Information Development/MID, which rose suspicions and concerns after April 5 elections, were reused. It was presumed that these rolls should have been corrected with the help of additional registers, however, again from the MID (according to the formula 2+ and 2-), namely: of those persons who have reached the age of 18 meanwhile, from the April 5 elections, of those who registered with a new place of residence (newcomers), of those who left their place of residence, as well as of those deceased. We will bring to the attention the fact that in the effort to rectify the rolls, the LPA used these registers, as well as the information from the civil status office (in 7 localities), while in 17 others, in villages, the local household registers were used. Door-to-door verification – diverging instructions: An efficient verification would have presumed door-to-door visits by the LPAs. IDOM observers reported that the CEC did not recommend such verification in all 33 localities. In 18 monitored localities the CEC did recommend the door-to-door verification, while in 14 localities the LPAs affirm that they did not receive such recommendations. The observers, however, reported that such door-to-door verifications were done by the LPAs in 14 localities. The information presented to the monitors was, however, contradictory. Thus, in some cases there was information according to which the LPAs had to follow the CEC decision no. 2555 from June 9, 2009 (including on verification), while in other cases the LPAs were suggested that door-to-door verification is inefficient because of the lack of time. Although the CEC representatives suggested the door-to-door verification in the 18 localities from those 33 monitored, only seven LPAs that received such instructions, conducted the verification: - Cahul District - Cahul Town (CPRM) - Bălţi Town (CPRM) - Nisporeni District – village of Bălăureşti (Independent) - Ştefan Vodă District – Ştefan Vodă town (CPRM) - Chişinău City (Buiucani City Sector, Centru City Sector) (LP) - Nisporeni District – Nisporeni town (LP) - Taraclia District – village of Albota de Jos (SDP) At the same time, upon local initiative, other seven LPAs from those who reported that they did not receive direct instructions form the CEC, also decided to perform door-to- door verification: - Taraclia District – village of Cairaclia (CPRM) - Găgăuz Autonomy - village of Copceac (although only to the homes of those who left for abroad) (Independent) - Hînceşti District – Hînceşti Town (PD) - Soroca District – village of Voloviţa (CPRM) Page 3 of 85 - Dubăsari District – village of Doroţcaia (to verify who needs a mobile ballot box) (CPRM) - Hînceşti District – village of Minjir (CPRM) - Soroca town (PNL) Thus, IDOM observers reported that, as it was mentioned above, the controversial lists of April 5, compiled on the basis of the information sent by the Ministry of Informational Development, are used again. However, additional lists are also used, again coming from the MID (lists sent according to the 2+ and 2– formula). LPAs had reduced capacities for the task. The responsibility for national elections rolls quality can not be placed only on LPAs: Another important conclusion from the Early Findings Report was that the LPAs had, in the majority of cases, low capacities/resources to compile and verify the electoral rolls. We consider that, in such circumstances, placing the responsibility for the accuracy of the electoral rolls only on LPAs shoulders is not justifiable. The elections in the Republic of Moldova decide not only the percentage through which the political parties assume the act of governance, while they also decide the quality of the governance, as well as ensure the legitimacy and credibility of a government. Under these circumstances, the responsibility for the compilation of quality electoral rolls, which are the basis of a free and fair electoral context, represent a subject of a national interest. Thus, it is the responsibility of all involved actors to ensure correct electoral rolls – be that the LPA, central authorities, as well as electoral structures in the country, starting with the CEC. The second phase of the project – the verification of the lists by the LPAs continued: During the second phase of the IDOM monitoring project, both LPAs and CEC were supposed to continue the verification of the voters’ rolls. Thus, according to the electoral calendar approved by the CEC, IDOM verified the activities in the following two periods of time: a. The period of electoral rolls additional verification: July 6-14, 2009 b. The period in which the rolls are placed at the disposal of the electoral bureaus at the polling stations: July 14-16, 2009. The date of July 16 was the last IDOM observation day, after which the process of verification was supposed to be done by other organisations, be it international, non- governmental or political. It was found that the additional rolls verification was done in 19 out of 33 monitored localities, in the period of July 6-14, 2009. However, in 14 LPAs such verification, stipulated by the electoral calendar, was not done: • in 5 cases the motivation was that the rolls are already precise • Stefan Vodă District - village of Antoneşti (Independent), • Stefan Vodă District - village of Carahasani (Independent), • Dubăsari District - village of Doroţcaia (CPRM), • Hînceşti District - village of Minjir (CPRM), • Nisporeni District - village of Bărboieni (Independent) • In 6 cases – without us having the information • Nisporeni District – village of Bălăureşti (Independent), • Taraclia District - village of Cairaclia (CPRM), • Soroca District - village of Stoicani (AMN), Page 4 of 85 • Village of Căinarii Vechi (Independent), • Drochia District - village of Sofia (SDP), • Cahul District - village of Larga (CPRM) • 3 cases – other motives, including, in one case, lack of human resources.