Gulbanu ABENOVA
January 25 (THE GLOBE)
THE GLOBE has already published results of the survey of the Kazakstan�s election campaign (issues 100-1 (issues 318-318, 2 (320) of October, November and December, 1998) conducted by THE GLOBE under the contract with the Delegation of the EC in Kazakstan and in association with the KISEF, social fund �Youth for Kazakstan�s Future� and Association of Sociologists and Political Scientists.
It is interesting that the opinion of the Kazak experts and preliminary conclusion of the statement of the OSCE/ODIHR have coincided in many aspects � terms of the elections, removal of some candidates, access to the media, and election campaign itself. Conclusion of the research conducted by THE GLOBE: on the whole, an opinion of the OSCE is not the last resort in this country, though experts� position on the elections is very much alike with the OSCE�s. Doubtless, it should be emphasized that it was not a public poll, but merely interviewing experts.
The early elections and
the procedure
Preliminary conclusion of the OSCE/ODIHR, and the particular point �Violation of civil rights to obtain official posts�, as of 11 January c. y. says, �Amendments to Section 4 of the Decree on Elections made on May 8, 1998 raised serious anxiety. The new provision does not permit registration for those candidates who had insignificant administrative punishment within a year prior to registration. Thus, �deliberated delict� served the reason of the refusal for registration of the two potential candidates. Application of this provision violates principles of the OSCE.� Another point �Impeding freedom of associations and meetings� says, �The law served an obstacle for registration of several groups, including political parties, and was used for intimidating of the persons involved�.
The experts defined public figures that, as they think, could be the right candidates for presidential post. On the top of the list there is Nazarbayev � 80%, then Kazhegeldin goes- 53.5%. As much as 15.3% of experts believe that Kazhegeldin infringed the current law and was accordingly bared from registration. 34.7% of the respondents objects this opinion. Over a half of experts (53.3%) do not consider the elections alternative.
Access to the media
The preliminary conclusion of the OSCE states that both state-owned and privately owned media dedicated disproportionally great share of time/space to the incumbent president. As for the appraisal of the election process, the OSCE/ODIHR expressed anxiety about the media in Kazakstan.
As per the monitoring mission carried out by the European Institute for the Media (EIM) in the field of media coverage of the presidential elections in Kazakstan, there was a noticeable bias toward the president in the press, both regional and national. Most of the media preferred not to pay attention to the obvious defects in the preparation for the elections, especially to unexpected amendments to the elections Law. Draft report of the EIM states that monitoring of the first week of the election race in the regions proved that the monitored TV companies gave air exclusively to Nazarbayev, other candidates were mentioned in passing. Majority of the experts of THE GLOBE and the KISEF mentioned the fact of unequal access of candidates to the media, as well as to organizational and informational support in the election racing.
Less than a quarter of the experts think that the candidates had no equal access to the media (16%), to organizational support (10.7%) and informational support (11.3%).
Over three fourths of the experts emphasize that in December the candidate for President office N. Nazarbayev was repeatedly mentioned in regional and city media. Less than one third of the experts (29.9%) admit the same fact in relation to Mr. Abdildin, result of G. Kasymov in this aspect is better (32.3%) and E. Gabassov�s is lower (14.6%).
About 90% of the experts mentioned using of voter encouraging means supporting N. Nazarbayev in all the five cities surveyed. Others candidate show just the contrary picture. Majority of the experts (over two thirds) is convinced that it is impossible to get any information concerning election orientation and intents of S. Abdildin, G, Kasymov and E. Gabbasov. One may appraise real coverage of election orientation and intents of the candidates basing on frequency of their appearing in the national and local media. In this term the leaders are N. Nazarbayev and G. Kasymov.
The regional and municipal media actively covered Nazarbayev�s activity. It was noticed by over 75% of experts. Less than one third of the experts (29.9%) admit the same fact in relation to Mr. Abdildin, result of G. Kasymov in this aspect is better (32.3%) and E. Gabassov�s is lower.
Another unexpectedness - mass activity in the elections
As the results of the survey proved, election campaigns of the candidates differed. Almaty citizens seemed to be the most educated in terms of politics, over 60% of the population showed interest in the elections, the experts claimed. The least active were citizens of Ust-Kamenogorsk and Karaganda. Experts also marked inequality of candidates in organization of election campaign. In their opinion, it was difficult for an average voter to make a choice due to lack of information.
72.7% of the experts consider Nazarbayev able to create a clear program of actions. As for other candidates, their positions are far worse: S. Abdildin � 20.0%, A. Kazhegeldin � 14.0%, G. Kasymov � 4.7%, E. Gabbasov � 0.7%.
94% of the experts were sure that Nazarbayev would be the victor, 2.0 believed in Abdildin�s success and 1.3 expected Kasymov to win.
One of the main results of the survey: as the experts concluded, majority of the voters does not show interest in the elections (54.0%). 49.3% expected that the elections of January 10 would be interesting for minority of the people.
Not a single expert expected such an active participation of the voters (86%). Neither prognosis of ASPS nor conclusion of the KISEF or other experts addressed the reality. One may claim that the CEC and authorized officers at the polls did not expected such a mass activity, like in the old Soviet times.
The evidence to that is a great deal of additional voter registration lists. The OSCE mission noticed this fact, too, �The number of the names entered on the additional lists seems to be overstated and is the evidence of defects of the process of voter registration�.
Probably, such a loyalty of the CEC is caused by the new point of the Election Law, pursuant to which only those who wish should participate in the elections. The victor must poll at least 51% of the voters showed up, while before over 51% of all the voters should show up so that elections were considered valid. As some observers reported, senior people and pensioners were very active in the polls, as it has almost become their tradition to participate in elections of every level. The senior people consider participation in the elections their civil duty and solemn obligation. Kind members of the election commission explained to many of the seniors which of the candidates should be ticked off and who should be crossed out.
It is relevant to notice that the OSCE/ODIHR admitted that the atmosphere on the Election Day was peaceful and calm, and still there were some violations registered when people voted one for another and even for whole families.
�The OSCE makes no claims�
This very headline opened a message of the ITAR-TASS in the capital paper the Otechestvo (the Homeland) as of January 7, 1999. A reporter of the Kazakstan�s service of the agency came to the above conclusion basing on the fact that a representative of the organization said they had an access to any relevant documents. The message was published in many regional papers of the republic. However, there was another OSCE/ODIHR message to Oslo as of 3 December, which reflected an appraisal of the election process. Preliminary message as of January 11 said, �The mission of the OSCE/ODIHR came to a conclusion that the election process left much to be desired and did not comply with the standards, which the Republic of Kazakstan should meet being a member-state of the organization�.
The Kazakstanskaya Pravda put this message in an article entitled �OSCE: Co-operation with Kazakstan will Go on� and interpreted as follows: the mission came to a conclusion that the election process in Kazakstan not always met the standards, which the Republic of Kazakstan is obliged to comply with. The state TV and print media pay more attention to the last point of the preliminary statement of the mission as of January 11, in which the organization confirmed its intents to assist the Government of the Republic of Kazakstan in preparation for the future elections, especially local and parliamentary, and implementation of the Memorandum of Mutual Understanding.
Though, some pro-president editions and TV channels after promulgation of the results of the elections claimed, �The Americans enjoying our hospitality expressed their non-satisfaction concerning illegitimate and non-democratic process�.
�Why everyone tries to teach us living? Americans think if they invented democracy they have the best knowledge of what it is�, a reporter of the Karavan paper thinks. The author of the program Nedyelka (KTK channel) �sings a cool rap� about foreign observers, as he thinks, and addresses to them, �It is none of your business, a foreigner, I vote for whom I wish and how I wish. It is my country, and I do what I wish. You, observers, do not belong here.� Sergey Tereschenko, the head of the candidate Nazarbayev�s election campaign headquarter stated on 14 January, �The OSCE stroke an attitude at the very beginning. This international organization said nothing new. It has one and the same opinion on every election process in the CIS.� �May the OSCE express its opinion, but the elections were held in accordance with the Kazakstani law� he said and added that the newly elected president agreed to that. Another politician, the leader of the Azamat group, believes that early elections were necessary. Though he was not aware of the OSCE message as of December 3, he stated that messages of an international organization were merely messages and no one would take them seriously. He informed that in a private discussion a representative of the OSCE said to him that conclusion of the organization would never change the situation in the country. Experts of an independent information agency supposed that Kazakstani partners of the OSCE were forced to express their anxiety about violation of the OSCE standards by the Republic of Kazakstan in the election process as silence of the OSCE would mean disagreement with the game rules thrust by the Kazakstani authorities.
Translation � INSEL
K.N.