“We are not interfering, only obser ving, ” says OSCE Mission Head in Ukraine Michael WYGANT
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) is to some extent an ephemeral entity. Much has been said that it is no longer needed, that it partially assumes the functions of other international organizations, such as the UN and the Council of Europe. Since the OSCE is infrequently mentioned, it could well be entered in a specially-established Red Book. It is perhaps during an election that the organization does not experience insufficient attention: the press comes in droves to interview the OSCE Mission. Ukraine has already been used to observers, for this is not for the first time that they have looked in on Ukrainian elections, and to their standard reports, “The mission has spotted some instances of election violations which did not on the whole affect the election results.” One can claim with a 100% guarantee that the commission’s conclusions will not be too original this time either. Yet, the reader can judge right now about the work of 300 OSCE observers to arrive in Ukraine (one of the most numerous groups of international observers). The Day has interviewed Michael WYGANT , ambassador of the OSCE Observation Mission to monitor the 2002 Verkhovna Rada elections in Ukraine.
“What are your first impressions about the election campaign in Ukraine?”
“It is too early to make any comment. OSCE rules also forbid me from doing so. As the election campaign goes on, we will also do our job. We have several experts, each of whom deals with a certain area of the electoral process. We’ve got a mass media and an election systems experts, a lawyer, and a political campaigns expert. There also is some administrative support staff. About March 31, we also put into operation thirteen two-man groups as long- term observers in the regions. We meet representatives of the government, non-governmental organizations, electoral commissions of different levels, and political figures. I am also in touch with the diplomatic corps and the international organizations interested in the Ukrainian elections. On the weekend, we expect the arrival of about three hundred short-term observers who will be directly monitoring the voting. Among the observers there are also people from non-governmental organizations and diplomatic missions. We are counting on the coming of about fifty European parliaments’ members representing the OSCE and Council of Europe Parliamentary Assemblies. Also arriving will be several European Parliament members. On the voting day, March 31, they will be visiting polling stations and then watching the count of ballots. On April 1, at midday or so, we plan to hold a press conference to make public our tentative report on the course of elections. We will be able to publish the final report in early May.”
“Have the observers had any difficulties at the current stage?”
“We have established cooperation with the central and district electoral commissions. We maintain good relations with both central and local authorities. We also receive representatives of parties and blocs, who share their own impressions of the elections.”
“So you would not say the observers work here in extreme conditions?”
“Difficulties could arise. For example, the question of observers traveling to the regions. In general, we do not expect too many unforeseen problems. We have the experience of monitoring Ukrainian elections in 1998 and 1999. So we know your country quite well. I headed here the OSCE Permanent Mission representation for one year, from 1997 to 1998. I was glad to come back to and visit your country again.”
“In what way do you draw up the tentative and final election observation reports? Do you take into account the opinion of all observers?”
“Yes, of course. As I have already said, long-term observers are now working in Ukraine. When the polls close, we will receive reports from short-term observers. We will hold a brief meeting with them early in the morning. With Ukraine being a vast territory and some observers having no opportunity to reach Kyiv in time, short-term and long-term observers will meet each other on the regional level. All their views and impression will be gathered in one report. We must take everything into account, so that the report is consistent and reflects all that occurred on March 31. The short-term observers will have a certain list of questions which they will take to and work with at the polling stations.”
“The last year’s presidential elections in Belarus showed rather interesting things about the OSCE report. Some of the OSCE observers stated their opinion was not taken into account when the report was being drafted. Moreover, they accused the OSCE of prejudice, saying that the report had been prepared long before the election... Could something of the kind occur in Ukraine?”
“I am not aware of the Belarusian case because I personally did not take part in it. There is a time-tested format for drafting the report. However, there can undoubtedly be people who will have a dissenting opinion on the report. It would be an extraordinary event if three hundred people shared the same point of view.”
“Are you afraid that the OSCE report could be the subject of internal political struggle in Ukraine?”
“The OSCE mission works here by invitation of the minister of foreign affairs, which shows Ukraine’s interest in open and fair elections. Our work is practically based on the techniques tried out over the past ten years, which provides certain guarantees that we will reflect the true state of affairs in the elections. It is up to Ukraine and other OSCE member states to decide how to react to this report. I think the OSCE has gained, over the past ten years, the reputation of an organization that provides an unbiased viewpoint, with due account of the experience of observations in dozens of countries.”
“What is the point in drawing up observers’ reports, in the observations as a whole? Did you ever see at least one report that yielded tangible results?”
“We do not observe for our own pleasure. Observations are important for the country itself. Since we have come here by invitation, Ukraine can use our report as it pleases. The state that allows observations can improve its legislation and electoral system in the future. There are certain standards adopted by 55 OSCE member states and enshrined in the Copenhagen Declaration. All the 55 agreed that election should be held precisely to these standards. If I am not mistaken, OSCE members decided in 1990 to conduct observations of and draw up reports on elections.”
“And who observes the observers, the extent to which they are unbiased?”
“You do.”
“Have you noticed any specific features, maybe some special know-how, in the Ukrainian election campaign?”
“This is the new election law which took into account the comments and remarks presented by the Council of Europe and OSCE. We believe the current law is more perfect than the one in 1998. Now we must see the way it will be put into practice.”
“Can we consider a perfect election law as a guarantee for fair and transparent elections?”
“A good law contributes to a good election. But, I say it again, the law should be obeyed in this case. The very spirit of a law is far more important than its letter. We have received confirmations from the Ukrainian side that it is interested in a free and transparent election.”
“When do you think independent observation of an election turns into direct interference in the internal affairs of a country?”
“We think we are not interfering but only watching. We do not control or supervise. The successful result of the electoral process will depend, above all, on the Ukrainian people.”
“Can you say by your experience whether the phenomenon of the administrative resource, so often mentioned with respect to Ukrainian elections, is typical of only young or also of mature democracies?”
“Anything can happen. Yet, the last time I was an observer of the elections in Estonia three years ago, the question of the administrative resource did not arise at all. This phenomenon does not exist there. As to other countries, I find it difficult to say.”
“And what country are you a citizen of ?”
“The United States.”
“So what about the administrative resource?”
“The US electoral process differs very much from one in Ukraine. There is nobody which functionally corresponds to your Central Electoral Commission. Our elections go from bottom to top, not from top to bottom. This means the election system is based on a certain level: that of a village, county, or state. If you like, each of the 50 US states has an election system of its own. For example, in my state of Maine, where there are up to 800,000 voters, every village or town forms an electoral apparatus of its own. When the polls close and votes have been counted, election results are reported to the state administration. In other words, the whole operation runs from bottom to top. The same system exists, in principle, in other states.”
