Transparency of democracy tarnished

On Aug. 31, 1999, on the 19th floor of the Hotel Borobudur, I observed the future of a united Indonesia as it was put in the hands of outsiders, representatives of the International Organization of Migration (IOM), appointed by the United Nations Mission in East Timor (UNAMET), to ensure that the votes on the issue of independence for the people of East Timor were accurately represented.

Dr. Kottek, president, and Ms. Ruth, deputy, were assisted by 10 Canadian IOM members whose job was to open the sealed ballot boxes and to record the votes. Two of the ballot boxes came from Yogyakarta, two from Surabaya, one from Ujungpandang, one from Bali and three from Jakarta. The IOM members were paired off and boxes assigned to each pair or three.

The boxes were unsealed and counting began at 2:30 p.m.. The process lasted approximately five hours -- with disappointing results. The counting procedures failed to meet the exacting standards of the code of conduct for observers as agreed by the parties and the Electoral Assistance Division in New York.

In this regard, I would like to refer to paragraph 9 (d) of the code of conduct (rights and privileges of observers): "To observe the campaign, the movement, use and disposal of sensitive electoral material (ballot boxes and ballot papers, etc.), the vote, the vote count, issuance and dissemination of election results, and the access to and use of the media" and paragraph 9 (e): "To examine the documentation related to the registration of voters, voting and the issuance of results".

Instead, they were ordered to sit down some distance from the table where the counting was taking place. It was not until the accredited observer showed the IOM members a copy of the Code of Conduct (established by the earlier agreement) that Dr. Kottek and Ms. Ruth finally allowed the observers to stand and get a closer view of the procedure. However, upon completion of the vote count, the IOM refused to announce the outcome -- either to the accredited observers, Indonesia in general, or to the East Timorese people especially. The observers were told that results of the referendum would first be sent to Darwin, then on to Dili.

Prior to the voting, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan expressed concern over the violence that preceded, and followed, President Habibie's authorization of a referendum for East Timor independence. As the result of Annan's concerns, the election was supervised by UNAMET appointees.

By refusing to announce the results, the IOM has succeeded in further agitating the political unrest and violence in East Timor, in undermining the agency's own credibility and in challenging the democratic philosophy which serves as our nation's very foundation and supports the transparency of democracy. If UNAMET wanted to demonstrate the transparency of democracy by supervising the ballot counting, it failed.

DIAN HAVID

Jakarta