European Union election observers noted "numerous irregularities" during the count at polling stations during Mozambique's general and provincial elections of 28 October - but the EU mission estimates that this malpractice did not significantly affect the results.
A statement issued by the EU Election Observation Mission on Wednesday says that in polling stations across the country returning officers refused to accept complaints from monitors of the political parties.
The returning officers who behaved in this way were guilty of a criminal offence. The polling station manual, which all polling station staff received, lists a number of electoral crimes, including "refusing to receive claims, protests or counter-protests from political party delegates".
The EU mission's brief statement does not list the polling stations where its observers saw this behaviour - but if it provides the National Elections Commission (CNE) and the Constitutional Council with such information, that should make prosecutions possible.
EU observers also received copies of six complaints from political parties referring to the voting and the count in Lichinga (Niassa province), Chimoio (Manica), Quelimane (Zambezia), Mutarara and Angonia (both in Tete).
These complaints were officially received by the polling station staff. Yet when CNE chairperson Joao Leopolda da Costa announced the results on 11 November, he said that the CNE had not received any complaints. So it seems as if the returning officers in the six cases mentioned by the EU simply failed to pass on the complaints to their superiors.
The EU observers also saw polling station staff illegally ban political party representatives from attending the count in four Tete districts (Maravia, Angonia, Changara and Tsangano) and in parts of Manica and Cabo Delgado provinces.
Despite the CNE's promises of transparency, EU observers themselves were barred from the district count in several districts, and from the provincial count in Tete, Niassa, Cabo Delgado and Nampula. In other words, there was no standard procedure - in seven provinces the observers could watch the count, and in four they could not.
The EU observers also noted the statistical impossibility achieved in dozens of polling stations where staff claimed that every single registered voter had voted. In an election where average turnout was 44 per cent, the EU mission came across turnouts of 100 per cent (or more than 100 per cent) in 40 polling stations in Gaza province, 61 in Tete, and two on Mozambique Island (in Nampula).
Anyone who takes results sheets with 100 per cent turnout seriously is claiming that in these parts of the country no voters died since registration began in September 2007, nobody was kept at home by illness on 28 October, and nobody moved out of the districts concerned.
On Mozambique Island, the EU mission, notes, there were signs of ballot box stuffing, as shown by "discrepancies between the number of ballot papers for each of the three elections" (presidential, parliamentary and provincial), and "discrepancies between the results announced after the count and the results that were publicly posted outside the polling station".
Furthermore there were a large number of invalid votes which bore signs of having been deliberately invalidated. This is the only type of fraud which Costa publicly recognised when he announced the results.
He admitted that ink marks had been added to ballot papers to make it looks as if voters had tried to vote for two candidates. The CNE has promised to notify the Attorney-General's Office of this.
All polling station staff were warned against vote tampering during their training, and the polling station manual states that "distorting, replacing, suppressing, stealing, destroying, or altering the electoral registers, ballot papers, polling station minutes, results sheets or any other electoral material or documents" is a crime.
Although the irregularities did not significantly alter the outcome of the elections (given the huge scale of the victory for the ruling Frelimo Party and for incumbent president Armando Guebuza), the EU mission warns that "they constitute a serious weakness".
Furthermore, the polling stations with 100 per cent turnout in Gaza and Tete may have altered the distribution of parliamentary seats in those two provinces.
The EU Mission promises to publish a full report of the elections, with detailed analysis, after the results have been validated by the Constitutional Council - which might not occur until early January.
Source: Alafrica (2009.11.18)
Nota: O sublinhado é meu
This is for you, Mr. Ambassador!
ResponderEliminarIt seems hard to understand the deep frustration that is felt by average Mozambicans. European taxpayers’ money has been misused. Significant portions of direct budgetary support and state equipment have been misused for campaigning and luxury. The indifference of politicians, in Brussels and in other European capitals, as to how hundreds of millions of Euros were applied to electoral fraud in Mozambique is a shame. Aid must be provided to assist the Mozambican people but not to fund helicopter flights, distorting, replacing, suppressing, stealing, destroying, or altering the electoral registers, ballot papers, polling station minutes, results sheets or any other electoral material.
How on earth can European leaders trust a leadership that continues to steal our money? The EU money for sure has not been used for what it was given. It enriched the Mozambican leadership and encouraged it taking kickbacks and pocketing. Therefore the European community as a whole should stop all direct budgetary support, which is the major cause of this years’ electoral fraud. European ambassadors should not try to downplay these unacceptable developments. No more money should be given without radical political reforms, respective benchmarks and EU monitoring! The European Commission is responsible that direct budgetary support has not been monitored at all in the past. Doing this they blindly co-sponsored the demise of democracy in Mozambique. The EU mission cannot steal itself away by simply issuing election reports. The EU must act!
José Simão
Caro Reflectindo,
ResponderEliminarsegundo o BPPM 32, a missao dos observadores da UE estava a sofrer pressao por parte do do G19 e Uniao Europeia no sentido de criticarem o processo eleitoral.
Segundo o mesmo boletim, o G19 encontraram-se com a chefia da missão de observadores da UE num encontro que por vezes se tornou azedo, com alguns embaixadores dos paises nórdicos a dizerem que os observadores da União Europeia estavam a ser muito complacentes com a CNE.
As minhas questoes sao:
1.que credibilidade tera um relatorio produzido nestas circunstancias?
2. Sera que nao eh um relatorio produzido para agradar o G19?
Nuno
Thanks Mr. Jose Simao, we will act.
ResponderEliminarSorry, are you Mozambican?
Caro Nuno Amorim
ResponderEliminar1. Que credibilidade? Duvidas? O que queres dizer? Queres dizer que não houve irregularidades o que eu chamo de crime? A tua resposta pode ser importante.
2. Sobre o artigo do AWEPA/CIP publiquei neste blog, não é verdade? O que está lá sobre a pressão? É mesmo para agradar ao G19 ou o G19 exige que o relatório diga a verdade e não escamoteá-la?
Nota: se quiseres republico o boletim de AWEPA/CIP
This is my answer, Mr. Ambassador!
ResponderEliminarPeople consider me a Madjermane, one of thousands of Mozambicans who worked as government slaves in East Germany.
José Simão