2018-04-26

West Bank and Gaza Strip

West Bank / Gaza

Adv. Ahmad Siam

Chairman of the Central Elections Commission for the elections of the Bar Association Council 2018/2021, held on 05/04/2018

 

Subject: MUSAWA’s monitoring report on the said elections

 

To begin with, we would like to express our thanks and appreciation to your respected commission for allowing our team to monitor the elections, as stated in your official letter to us on 25/03/2018, where you invited us to monitor the elections of the Bar Association Council and stressed that the monitoring process cover the northern as well as southern governorates. MUSAWA welcomed the invitation and provided you with the names of our monitoring team, which included the following lawyers:

 

Angham Mansour, Banan Tantour, Shurooq Abu-Qare’, and Ibrahim Barghouthi / Ramallah & Al-Bireh; Fida’ Dawadeh / Hebron; Haya Banoura and Shireen Hazboun / Bethlehem; Magida Awajneh / Jericho; Abdul Rahmad Yaeesh / Nablus; Rozan Al-Jallad and Odai Suleiman / Jenin; Rana Obeid / Tulqarm; Hamza Abu-Shihab / Qalqilya; Dia’ Dakrouk and Mohammad Shawqi Mohammad Salimeh / Salfit; Yahya Abbas / Tubas; Dania Ghazawi / Jerusalem; Rula Mousa, Sameh Safi, Mohammad Al-Loh, Hala Hassanein, and Faten Ghabayen / Gaza.

 

In reference to your official letter to us, mentioned above, we note that the monitoring process was limited to the phases of election silence, election campaign, and vote counting.

 

The key observations documented by MUSAWA’s monitoring team are the following:

 

1- The election campaign proceeded even after the election silence was declared. The lawyers were being contacted during the silence period, which influenced the right to privacy. Social Media was being used non-stop during the election campaign.

 

2- The rules of election silence were violated not only by the supporters of candidates but also by some of the candidates themselves.

 

3- Your respected commission was unable to take the necessary action to enforce the binding election silence despite the fact that we had brought this matter to your attention. The supporters of the candidates were allowed to proceed with the election campaign and accompanied the voters to the voting station, and near the ballot boxes.

 

4- Some security officers were present in some election stations (Tubas) under the pretext that they will interfere in case trouble is stirred-up. The person in charge  of the said election station did not take any action in this regard even though MUSAWA’s election observer asked him to do so while informing him that security personnel shall not be allowed into the electoral headquarters (the headquarters of the Bar), given that it serves as a ballot station. The observer continued to ask the person in charge to give instructions that no security officers are allowed in the headquarters. Following communications between the security services and the Head of the said committee, it was agreed that the security officers must leave the voting station, given that they would be asked to interfere only by direct orders from the Head of the committee. 

 

5- A member of Tubas’ constituency was late, and a number of voters casted their votes in his absence.

 

6- One of the voters in Tubas entered the chamber of the Head of Tubas’ election committee, and he refused to abide by the orders that he should leave the room. The Head of the said committee was unable to make him show respect for the procedures and regulations, which state that he shall not be present there after having casted his vote.

 

7- A quarrel arose between one of the candidates’ supporters and the Head of the committee because the former insisted and kept asking the committee to provide him with the names of the lawyers who did not cast their votes, knowing that he had no power to do so (Tubas).

 

8- A supporter (female) of a certain electoral bloc disseminated cards inside the ballot hall (Jericho).

 

9- Some supporters asked voters to tell them whom they voted for (Jericho).

 

10- Jericho’s ballot hall was so small that voters did not take their time in the voting process.

 

11- Supporters of some candidates came into the voting station holding cards which had the names of some candidates written on them, and they did not abide by the rule that they should be kept outside the hall (Jericho).

 

12- One of the candidates stood by the ballot hall and proceeded with his election campaign, which obstructed the movement of voters. When asked to leave the place where he was standing, the candidate threatened to cause trouble (Ramallah).

 

13- Hand-to-hand fighting took place at the entrance of the ballot hall between one of the candidates and a lawyer (Ramallah).

 

14- Visits by governors and their escorts, some ministers, and political figures to the voting stations caused a chaos that resulted from taking pictures (Jericho, Ramallah).

 

15- Some supporters used the “carrot-dangler” style in encouraging voters to cast their votes in favor of certain candidates during the period of election silence, promising them that “they will not be forgotten” and that they will be “supported” (Ramallah).

 

16- Ballot papers were distributed to voters inside the ballot station (Qalqilya).

 

17- A candidate proceeded with his election campaign at the entrance of the voting station (Qalqilya).

 

18- No observers were present to monitor the vote counting process except for MUSAWA’s observer (Hebron).

 

19- A voter picked-up his mobile phone to take a photograph of the ballot paper (Jenin).

 

20- The only Civil Society Organization which monitored the vote counting process was MUSAWA (Jenin).

 

21- MUSAWA’s monitoring team was denied access to the election station in Gaza even though the Chairman of the Central Elections Commission as the supervising committee in Gaza were contacted several times regarding this matter.

 

22- The election campaigns proceeded via text messages throughout the polling day as well as during the period of election silence (Gaza).

 

23- Supporters used microphones as part of the election campaign throughout the voting process, and they set-up tents where they proceeded with the election campaign using the microphones (Gaza).

 

24- Throughout the voting process, cards with the names of candidates were being distributed in front of the ballot station (Gaza).

 

25- A heated exchange of accusations took place between supporters of candidates, using microphones (Gaza).

 

26- Election campaigns continued on social media platforms, disregarding the binding rules of election silence (Gaza).

 

In light of the observations pointed-out above, we believe it is vital to take the appropriate legal action that would ensure us decent and transparent elections. In addition, we stress that all CSOs shall be guaranteed the right to monitor the election process on equal grounds, unlike what happened in Gaza.

 

In conclusion, we believe that some violations have negatively affected the transparency and impartiality of the elections, regardless of the lack of evidence that these violations have influenced the election results, particularly that not even one of the candidates has objected to the results or challenged them. We note that MUSAWA’s monitoring team made sure to immediately contact the constituencies’ committees to address any infringements of the law or the election rules. We hope of your respected Commission to act upon our observations to ensure that the aforementioned violations will not occur again in future elections.

 

With all due respect,

 

Issued on 26/04/2018

 

Executive Manager

Ahlam Tarayra