Shahin Abbasov 12/16/04
Azerbaijan’s opposition parties plan to boycott the country’s December 17 municipal elections, the first national poll since the contentious October 2003 presidential vote. Opposition members point to difficulties in registering their candidates as an explanation for the decision, but some analysts argue that city governments’ lack of political independence may have been the deciding factor.
On November 30, the Musavat Party, one of Azerbaijan’s largest opposition parties, became the first to announce its pull-out from the elections. The Democratic Party of Azerbaijan (DPA) and the Popular Front Party of Azerbaijan, both influential opposition forces, quickly followed suit.
Failure by the government to amend the electoral code or to take into consideration recommendations from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) for preventing procedural violations were among the factors that prompted Musavat’s decision, Chairman Isa Gambar told journalists on November 30, according to the news agency Turan. Popular Front Secretary Hasan Karimov told ANS TV on December 2 that meetings with voters had been forbidden and that campaigning for the elections was prohibited. “So, under these conditions we decided that the boycott is the only option left for us.”
All three parties have charged that difficulties in registering opposition candidates for the vote have precluded their participation in the elections. Party members, however, charge that even without these difficulties, the elections would still be falsified.
A statement released on December 9 by the 24-party opposition bloc Our Azerbaijan argued that “The bloc considers impossible its participation in the upcoming elections as there is not any opportunity of holding democratic election campaign in the country and municipalities are dependent on executive bodies.”
US Ambassador Rino Harnish is among those who have criticized the opposition’s boycott, describing himself as “surprised” at the decision. At a recent meeting, Harnish said that he asked leaders of Musavat and the Popular Front Party “how they considered it possible to obtain democracy if they don’t interact with voters,” the Baku daily Echo reported on December 16.
Figures from Azerbaijan’s election commission illustrate the extent of the problem. According to figures from the Central Election Commission (CEC), more than half of the 38,866 people registered to run in the municipal elections, or 22,103 candidates, represent the ruling party, Yeni Azerbaijan. By comparison, the number of opposition candidates registered is miniscule: only 274 Musavat party members and 526 Popular Front Party members had been registered before the opposition boycott was announced. The remaining 14,000 candidates registered for the elections are not party-affiliated.
Nonetheless, the boycott is far from firm. Some opposition parties – the National Independence Party and the Yurddash Party, for instance – and some individual candidates have decided to run despite the allegations of a pre-determined outcome.
Emil Mamedov, a regional supervisor for the Democratic Party of Azerbaijan in Salyan region, about 93 miles south from Baku, is one of those candidates. “A political party is for struggle. I know that elections are usually falsified,” Mamedov told EurasiaNet. “But why do we have to change our plans if somebody tries to violate our rights? I am among 35 other candidates for the municipality of Salyan city, and I believe that I have the chance to win and be elected.”
Mamedov’s case, however, is an exception. The overwhelming majority of opposition candidates are supporting their parties’ decision to boycott the elections.
The boycott decision comes as a complete about-face from earlier declarations. A few months ago, opposition leaders stated that the municipal elections would be a general rehearsal for their performance in parliamentary elections scheduled for 2005 and termed them as “crucial” for the parties’ political future.
Nor has the international community expressed support for the sudden reversal in strategy. US Ambassador Rino Harnish is among those who have criticized the opposition’s boycott.
Even before the boycott, however, opposition parties were showing little muscle in promoting their candidates, particularly in the regions. Some local political experts blame this passivity on the government’s brutal crackdown on the opposition following the protests that marked the election of President Ilham Aliyev on October 15, 2003. Others point to the lowly status and limited authority of city governments in Azerbaijan.
“Municipalities in Azerbaijan today are in an undefined state,” said Aydin Guliyev, a leader of the DPA. “There is no clear legal basis for them, the sources of their financing are undefined, and they are dependent on the executive branch of government. In fact, they often act as a duplicate for local representatives of executive government.” Without a change in their status, Guliyev added, city governments would do little to advance the cause of the opposition.
Overall, the polls have been marked by widespread indifference. Candidates will face very limited competition for each seat. According to the CEC, fewer than two people will run for each of the 21,000 city government seats up for election, on average.
In Baku, where there is no sign of an election campaign underway, the lack of interest is hard to miss. Eldar Ismaylov, head of the local non-governmental organization For Civil Society, expects a very low turnout on December 17, especially in Azerbaijan’s biggest cities. “I feel it already,” Ismaylov said.
Yet Ismaylov fears that the extent of voting fraud could be more extensive than in previous elections. “The local executive power is more interested in the municipalities than the central government is. The local executive committees have their own favorites to be elected,” Ismaylov said.
As the accusations fly, the example of Ukraine is being kept in view by both the government and opposition. On December 3, days after Musavat announced its election boycott, parliamentary deputy speaker Ziyafet Askerov charged that the Popular Front Party planned to use the elections to stage a coup. Funding for the coup, he charged, came from the Ukrainian opposition organization Pora! (Yes!), which is backing opposition presidential candidate Viktor Yushenko.
Dismissing the charges, Ali Kerimili, a leader of the Popular Front Party, traced the accusations to a different source. Ruling party Yeni Azerbaijan, he said, has realized that it “cannot continue falsifying the outcome of elections forever.”
Editor’s Note: Shahin Abbasov is a freelance journalist in Baku.
Yorumlar kapatıldı.