Background Briefing

Update To "Azerbaijan Parliamentary Elections 2005, Lessons Not Learned"

November 3, 2005

On the day Human Rights Watch finalized its briefing paper on the November 6, 2005 parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan, President Ilham Aliev issued an executive order on the elections. This Update to our briefing paper assesses the significance of this order.

The October 25 executive order calls on the parliament and Central Election Commission to introduce a series of measures that would help prevent multiple voting, remove restrictions on election observers, establish complaints procedures, and enhance accountability for electoral violations. Although the order is an important step, its very late introduction—less than two weeks before the elections—makes effective implementation of these measures during the upcoming elections highly unlikely. In any case, the widespread bias in the media in favor of pro-government parties, restrictions on freedom of assembly, and arrests, beatings and intimidation of opposition activists that have characterized the electoral campaign, have already fundamentally tainted the integrity of the vote. The executive order does not change that.

The executive order, entitled “Urgent Measures in Connection with the Preparation and Conducting of the Elections to the Milli Majlis of the Republic of Azerbaijan,” recommends that the parliament and Central Election Commission take the following steps:

  • Remove the ban on nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) with foreign funding from acting as observers;

  • Introduce the use of invisible ink to mark voters' fingers;

  • Add addresses to the voter lists;

  • Prepare instructions on how election commissions should deal with complaints;

  • Prepare instructions on using legal measures to punish infringements of the law by candidates; and

  • Ensure the provision of identification documents for voters without such documents.1

    The international community had called on the government to adopt several of these measures, which if properly implemented, would have a positive effect on the election environment, and improve the voting process on election day.

    In response to the executive order, parliament lifted the ban on foreign-funded NGOs from acting as observers in the elections on October 28.2 Similarly, the Central Election Commission decided to use invisible ink to mark voters' fingers and has initiated steps to import the necessary equipment.3 It remains unclear whether steps have been taken to introduce the other measures called for in the executive order.

    The late introduction of the executive order, however, makes at least one of its provisions entirely meaningless: the decision to lift the ban on observers from NGOs with foreign funding came after the deadline for registering observers expired on October 27.4 The executive order’s late introduction also puts the effective implementation of the other measures in doubt. For example, international election experts told Human Rights Watch that the use of invisible ink to avoid multiple voting can only work effectively if officials are properly trained and the necessary equipment is available to detect the ink.5 The time left before the elections is clearly too short to conduct such training, even if the authorities manage to import the required equipment.

    The executive order has not changed the general atmosphere in Azerbaijan. For weeks there has been a strong pro-government bias in the media, local government officials continue to campaign on behalf of government sponsored candidates and pressure government employees, particularly teachers, to support these candidates, the government continues to limit freedom of assembly, and opposition activists have been arrested and otherwise intimidated. These abuses have continued since the order was issued.

    For example, Human Rights Watch has received information that on October 31 and November 1 in the city of Ganja, local government authorities ordered that school classes be suspended while teachers attend a meeting with a candidate for the Yeni Azerbaijan Party (New Azerbaijan Party, the ruling government party).6 In another case, a member of a local election commission, who is an opposition supporter, told Human Rights Watch that he continued to remain under constant surveillance by two law enforcement officers.7 Harassment of family members of candidates also continues: According to an independent candidate, on November 1 police visited his close relative at work on two occasions and demanded that he go to the police station. There, a police investigator pushed and swore at him. This followed job dismissal threats from local government authorities to another close relative of the candidate.8

    The authorities also arrested several more opposition supporters as part of its investigation into the alleged coup plot. Although Human Rights Watch is not in a position to assess whether a coup plot indeed existed, the arrest on October 27 of Eldar Salaev, a well-known academic in his seventies, raised concern that the government is using the alleged plot as an excuse for a wider crackdown on the opposition.





    [1] The order also instructed the relevant authorities to ensure that electricity and communications are provided uninterrupted to the buildings where district and local election commissions are located, and to implement the law on freedom of assembly.

    [2] “Parliament Removed Ban on Monitoring Elections by NGOs Funded by Foreign Organizations,” Turan Information Agency, October 28, 2005.

    [3] Human Rights Watch interviews with members of the diplomatic community, Baku, October 28, 2005.

    [4] See the Central Election Commission’s official website, [online] http://www.cec.gov.az/en/4millimajlis2005/calendar/calendar.htm#Oktyabr (retrieved November 2, 2005).

    [5] Human Rights Watch interview with international election expert, Baku, October 3, 2005.

    [6] E-mail communication received by Human Rights Watch from an independent candidate, November 2, 2005.

    [7] E-mail communication received by Human Rights Watch from an opposition member of a local election commission in the south of the country, October 31, 2005.

    [8] E-mail communication received by Human Rights Watch from an independent candidate, November 2, 2005.