ODIHR Election Activities, 2009
Country
Election
Date
Mission
Former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia
Presidential & Municipal
22 March & 5 April
EOM
2 Montenegro
Early parliamentary
29 March
EOM
3 Moldova
Parliamentary
5 April
EOM
4 Iceland
General
25 April
EAM
Parliamentary
4-7 June
EGA
6 Albania
Parliamentary
28 June
EOM
7 Bulgaria
Parliamentary
5 July
LEOM
8 Kyrgyzstan
Presidential
23 July
EOM
9 Moldova
1
5
10
European Union (covering 15
participating States)
Early parliamentary
29 July
EOM
10 Norway
Parliamentary
14 September
EAM
11 Germany
Parliamentary
27 September
EAM
12 Portugal
Parliamentary
27 September
EAM
13 Greece
Parliamentary
4 October
EAM
14 Romania
Presidential
22 November & 6
December
LEOM
15 Croatia
Presidential
27 December
LEOM
16 Uzbekistan
Parliamentary
27 December
EAM
levels of public confidence in the conduct of elections, the existence of well-tested election practices,
a legal framework that is in line with OSCE commitments, respect for fundamental rights and freedoms,
proven checks and balances (including an independent
judiciary), an open civil society, a pluralistic media sector and the potential usefulness of an ODIHR presence.
Unfortunately, although ODIHR would like to deploy a
NAM to each participating State holding an election,
existing constraints make this impossible.
In six of the 16 elections mentioned above, ODIHR
sent full-format election observation missions (EOMs),
which include the deployment of core teams of experts,
as well as long and short-term observers seconded
by OSCE participating States. Three limited election
observation missions (LEOMs) were deployed to countries where the presence of long-term observers was
deemed to be useful but where election-day issues
were either not expected to be problematic or where
systemic shortcomings were so significant as to render
election-day observation procedures largely meaningless. There were six cases in which election assessment
missions (EAMs) were deployed to elections for which
the involvement of long and short-term observers was
deemed unnecessary, either due to the existence of
effective checks and balances and the high level of confidence in the election process or, conversely, due to
a lack of sufficient guarantees to warrant such a high
number of observers.
Elections
Ten OSCE participating States were visited for the first
time in an election context, thus widening the scope
of observation activities and ensuring a higher level of
scrutiny across the region. This trend will continue in
the future. Over the course of 2009, ODIHR published
67 election-related reports (needs assessment mission
reports, interim reports, preliminary statements, final
reports and various legal reviews) and some 35 press
releases.
These efforts were undertaken with a view to assisting a wide range of participating States in improving
their electoral processes, in accordance with the
requirements of the 1990 OSCE Copenhagen Document. These observation activities both evaluated the
extent to which OSCE commitments and other international standards for democratic elections had been met
and focused on measures that could be taken by participating States to improve future election processes.
A total of about 2,300 observers, from 52 participating States and three OSCE Partners for Co-operation,
were deployed by ODIHR in 2009. In order to further
promote the objective of diversification, as set out in
Ministerial Council Decision No. 19/06, “Strengthening
the Effectiveness of the OSCE”, ODIHR also continues to make use of the “Fund for Diversification”. This
extra-budgetary programme allows ODIHR to more
effectively draw observers from a variety of participating States, especially those that do not traditionally
second observers. On this basis, ODIHR funded the
ODIHR Annual Report 2009
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents