Ethiopia elections fell short of international standards: EU Final Report

EU Executive Summary

March 14, 2006

"During a demonstration in Addis Ababa on 8 June, security forces killed at least 36 citizens and in the aftermath arrested thousands of persons, mostly linked to the opposition, who were accused of spreading ‘political unrest’. Leaders of the opposition were harassed and threatened, and some were kept under house arrest. Opposition offices were raided and staff was arrested."

The 2005 parliamentary elections were the third since the introduction of nominal multiparty elections in 1995. As such, they were an important test of the progress Ethiopia has made towards democracy. The decision by the Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) government to open up the elections to unprecedented competition and international observation was a bold move.

The legal framework for elections guarantees basic freedoms and is generally adequate for the conduct of democratic elections. However, a number of areas of concern need to be addressed, including the size of constituencies and restrictions on the number of candidates that can stand in a constituency. Moreover, the election law is not very detailed on some key aspects of elections, such as counting, aggregation and publication of results. Criminal legislation related to media conduct raises serious concerns.

The National Electoral Board of Ethiopia (NEBE) did not enjoy the confidence of opposition parties. Nevertheless, it made efforts to reach out by convening regular meetings with political parties to try to address problems that arose. While the NEBE generally organised the process efficiently until election day, it contributed to the significant delays in counting and aggregation after election day. The NEBE barred a considerable number of domestic observer groups from monitoring the elections. Although this decision was later revoked by the courts, the judgement came too late to allow effective observation by these groups.

Lower level election commissions showed insufficient training, particularly in regard to counting and aggregation procedures. Reports were received from a significant number of election officials of pressure from government officials or ruling party representatives. An overlap between government officials and the electoral administration was evident, particularly in rural areas, which is problematic in a country where the state and the ruling party are not properly separated.

Voters were registered in large numbers, but women, representing only 48% of registered voters, appear to have been under-registered. Allowing students the right to vote was important in order to guarantee universal suffrage, but the inclusion of their votes in the constituencies where their families are resident led to significant problems during the counting and aggregation of results. Candidate registration generally went well and a higher number of candidates than ever before participated in the elections. There was a significant number of women candidates, due mainly to efforts by the EPRDF to boost women’s participation through candidate quotas.

The campaign was freer than previous elections and, in contrast to previous elections, the opposition campaigned not only in cities, but increasingly also in rural areas. There was no large-scale unrest and large demonstrations in Addis Ababa were held peacefully. Nevertheless, opposition candidates and supporters experienced intimidation and arrests. In addition, many EU observers reported examples of state institutions supporting the EPRDF campaign. The end of the campaign became more heated and government representatives compared the opposition to the perpetrators of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. One opposition party responded by making the same comparison in relation to the government.

The media in Ethiopia is dominated by the state. Prior to election day, state and private media provided generally balanced coverage. During this period, there was a notable opening of the state media to the political parties contesting the elections, and print space and airtime was afforded to the main coalitions challenging the ruling party. Live broadcast of debates between the main political actors permitted genuine democratic discussion and raised public interest in the electoral process throughout the country. On 15 May, voting was conducted peacefully and was generally well administered, despite some shortages of material resources. Political party representatives were present in most of the polling stations visited by EU observers, and domestic observers were present in around half of the polling stations visited. Turn-out was very high and voters often waited for many hours to cast their vote. Procedures were generally well followed in 80 per cent of polling stations visited by EU observers.

EU observers assessed the closing and counting processes negatively in almost half of urban polling stations observed, a very high figure for international observers to record, and even worse in rural polling stations observed. Counting was very slow in most areas. Very significant numbers of ballot papers were considered to be invalid during counting, in many cases due to over restrictive interpretation by election officials. Delays also occurred with re-counting and aggregation at the constituency level. There was also a lack of transparency in the publication of results. Result sheets were only displayed at 29 per cent of rural polling stations observed and 36 per cent of urban polling stations observed at the completion of counting. In 25 per cent of polling stations observed, political party representatives were not provided with a copy of the results. Additionally, a number of constituency offices observed did not publicly post results and in most cases observed did not send the results of re-counts back to polling stations for public posting, as required by election legislation. EU observers witnessed cases that suggested serious irregularities with election results, including figures that were implausible.

In the post election day period, the human rights situation deteriorated, starting with a blanket ban, issued immediately after the end of voting, on freedom of assembly in the capital. Media coverage also worsened. State media published statements by government/EPRDF personnel claiming victory in the elections, despite the fact that counting was still underway, but refused to publish opposition statements. Incidents involving students started on the night of 5 June and extended on 6 and 7 June with hundreds being arrested. During a demonstration in Addis Ababa on 8 June, security forces killed at least 36 citizens and in the aftermath arrested thousands of persons, mostly linked to the opposition, who were accused of spreading ‘political unrest’. Leaders of the opposition were harassed and threatened, and some were kept under house arrest. Opposition offices were raided and staff was arrested.

Despite efforts by the NEBE to establish a system to deal with complaints, overall the process failed to provide an effective remedy to contestants, given that it took place in the context of serious violations of human rights and freedoms, namely of opposition leaders and suspected supporters, which undermined the opposition’s ability to participate effectively in the process. In addition, there were serious concerns about whether the set up of the Complaints Investigation Panels (CIP) provided a level playing field. While appeals against NEBE decisions could be made to the Supreme Court, both institutions were headed by the same person, raising questions as to whether the judiciary offered an effective remedy for such cases.

The repeat elections in 31 constituencies on 21 August were generally well-administered, but with much lower turnout and considerably reduced presence of party observers from the opposition. The election process in the delayed Somalia region elections on the same day was marred by serious irregularities.

Despite the shortcomings in these elections, the high level of participation by the Ethiopian people and the opening of public debate prior to election day marked a significant development towards democracy in Ethiopia, showing the eagerness of citizens to make use of new political freedoms, which should serve as an inspiration for the future.