Transparency of democracy tarnished<\/p>\n
On Aug. 31, 1999, on the 19th floor of the Hotel Borobudur, I
\nobserved the future of a united Indonesia as it was put in the
\nhands of outsiders, representatives of the International
\nOrganization of Migration (IOM), appointed by the United Nations
\nMission in East Timor (UNAMET), to ensure that the votes on the
\nissue of independence for the people of East Timor were
\naccurately represented.<\/p>\n
Dr. Kottek, president, and Ms. Ruth, deputy, were assisted by
\n10 Canadian IOM members whose job was to open the sealed ballot
\nboxes and to record the votes. Two of the ballot boxes came from
\nYogyakarta, two from Surabaya, one from Ujungpandang, one from
\nBali and three from Jakarta. The IOM members were paired off and
\nboxes assigned to each pair or three.<\/p>\n
The boxes were unsealed and counting began at 2:30 p.m.. The
\nprocess lasted approximately five hours -- with disappointing
\nresults. The counting procedures failed to meet the exacting
\nstandards of the code of conduct for observers as agreed by the
\nparties and the Electoral Assistance Division in New York.<\/p>\n
In this regard, I would like to refer to paragraph 9 (d) of
\nthe code of conduct (rights and privileges of observers): \"To
\nobserve the campaign, the movement, use and disposal of sensitive
\nelectoral material (ballot boxes and ballot papers, etc.), the
\nvote, the vote count, issuance and dissemination of election
\nresults, and the access to and use of the media\" and paragraph 9
\n(e): \"To examine the documentation related to the registration of
\nvoters, voting and the issuance of results\".<\/p>\n
Instead, they were ordered to sit down some distance from the
\ntable where the counting was taking place. It was not until the
\naccredited observer showed the IOM members a copy of the Code of
\nConduct (established by the earlier agreement) that Dr. Kottek
\nand Ms. Ruth finally allowed the observers to stand and get a
\ncloser view of the procedure. However, upon completion of the
\nvote count, the IOM refused to announce the outcome -- either to
\nthe accredited observers, Indonesia in general, or to the East
\nTimorese people especially. The observers were told that results
\nof the referendum would first be sent to Darwin, then on to Dili.<\/p>\n
Prior to the voting, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan expressed
\nconcern over the violence that preceded, and followed, President
\nHabibie's authorization of a referendum for East Timor
\nindependence. As the result of Annan's concerns, the election was
\nsupervised by UNAMET appointees.<\/p>\n
By refusing to announce the results, the IOM has succeeded in
\nfurther agitating the political unrest and violence in East
\nTimor, in undermining the agency's own credibility and in
\nchallenging the democratic philosophy which serves as our
\nnation's very foundation and supports the transparency of
\ndemocracy. If UNAMET wanted to demonstrate the transparency of
\ndemocracy by supervising the ballot counting, it failed.<\/p>\n
DIAN HAVID<\/p>\n
Jakarta<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/transparency-of-democracy-tarnished-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }