REZIME

Nakon poziva Centralne izborne komisije (CIK) Bosne i Hercegovine (BiH), Ured OSCE-a za demokratske institucije i ljudska prava (OSCE/ODIHR) je rasporedio Izbornu posmatračku misiju za opće izbore 12. oktobra. OSCE/ODIHR je procijenio usklađenost izbornog procesa sa obavezama prema OSCE-u, drugim međunarodnim obavezama i standardima za demokratske izbore te sa domaćim zakonodavstvom. Za dan izbora je Izborna posmatračka misija OSCE/ODIHR udružila napore sa delegacijama Parlamentarne skupštine OSCE-a i Parlamentarne skupštine Vijeća Evrope da bi formirali Međunarodnu izbornu posmatračku misiju.

Kao što je odraženo u Izjavi o preliminarnim nalazima i zaključcima od 13. oktobra 2014. godine, izbori su održani u konkurentskom okruženju u kojem su kandidati mogli provoditi kampanje slobodno, a osnovne slobode izražavanja, udruživanja i okupljanja su poštovane. Iako su izbori provedeni efikasno, rasprostranjeni vjerodostojni navodi o slučajevima manipulacija izbornih kandidata sastavom biračkih odbora smanjili su povjerenje aktera u integritet procesa. Usto, nedostatak zajedničke vizije o budućnosti zemlje i saradnje između tri konstitutivna naroda nastavlja kočiti reforme neophodne da se u potpunosti osiguraju demokratski izbori. Rastuće nepovjerenje građana u funkcioniranje demokratskih institucija dovodi stabilnost u opasnost.

Građani BiH su glasali za šest odvojenih nivoa u okviru kompleksnog institucionalnog poretka unutar države podijeljene na dva entiteta: Federacija BiH (FBiH) i Republika Srpska (RS). Na državnom nivou, građani su glasali za Predsjedništvo BiH i Predstavnički dom Parlamentarne skupštine BiH (PD BiH). Na entitetskom nivou su građani glasali za Predstavnički dom FBiH, predsjednika i potpredsjednike RS, i Narodnu skupštinu RS. Međuetničke podjele ostaju odlučujući faktori u političkim raspravama u zemlji.

Pravni okvir je generalno dovoljan za provođenje demokratskih izbora. Nedavnim izmjenama i dopunama zakona su ispoštovane neke ranije preporuke OSCE/ODIHR-a, uključujući i povećanje

kvote zastupljenosti spolova na 40% i u izbornoj administraciji i na kandidatskim listama.

Međutim, nedostatak političke volje da se odmakne od Općeg okvirnog sporazuma za mir iz 1995. godine (Dejtonski mirovni sporazum) znači da važni i dugotrajni nedostaci ostaju. Konkretno, ograničenja prava kandidiranja i glasanja zasnovana na etničkoj pripadnosti suprotna su obavezama prema OSCE-u i standardima Vijeća Evrope. Nažalost, ovo su drugi izbori koji se održavaju uz kršenje presude Evropskog suda za ljudska prava u predmetu Sejdić-Finci.

Broj glasova potreban kandidatu da bude izabran znatno varira u svakoj izbornoj jedinici, čime se narušava princip jednakosti glasa. Zakonski uslov da se redovno preispituju granice izbornih jedinica i raspodjela mandata nije ispunjen.

CIK je generalno proveo izbore efikasno i uživao je povjerenje među većinom izbornih aktera. Sjednice CIK-a su bile otvorene za akreditirane posmatrače i medije, dok je većina općinskih izbornih komisija (OIK) održavala neformalne sastanke. Brojni su navodni slučajevi angažiranja izbornih kandidata u trgovini mjestima u biračkim odborima da bi dobili veću zastupljenost u oblastima od posebnog interesa. Ovo je rezultiralo političkom neravnotežom u biračkim odborima

i smanjilo povjerenje u njihovu sposobnost da provedu izbore bez neregularnosti.

Sve skupa, pouzdanost u tačnost Centralnog biračkog spiska je postojala. Broj birača koji su ispunjavali uslove za ove izbore je bio 3.278.908. Po prvi put, birači u Brčko Distriktu morali su odabrati državljanstvo jednog od dva entiteta da bi mogli glasati. Uprkos nastojanjima da se birači u Distriktu informiraju o tome, neki nisu bili voljni da se izjasne za entitetsko državljanstvo. Vlasti su mogle više nastojati da obavijeste birače o uslovima za utvrđivanje identiteta birača i da evidentiraju interno raseljena lica. Nekoliko sagovornika Izborne posmatračke misije OSCE/ODIHR je takođe izrazilo zabrinutost za integritet glasanja poštom.

U generalno sveobuhvatnom procesu, CIK je ovjerio 51 političku stranku, 14 koalicija i 15 nezavisnih kandidata za takmičenje na državnim i entitetskim izborima. Za izbore za Predsjedništvo BiH je ovjereno 17 kandidata od kojih je bila samo jedna žena. Za izbor predsjednika i potpredsjednika RS je ovjereno 19 kandidata od kojih su bile dvije žene. Novi uslov o zastupljenosti spolova od 40% je poštovan na kandidatskim listama, pri čemu su žene dobile 19% mjesta u državnom i entitetskim zakonodavnim tijelima. Odredbe o povratku takse za ovjerusu pretjerane i glase suprotno dobroj praksi.

Svi izborni kandidati su mogli provoditi kampanju bez smetnji, a slobode udruživanja i okupljanja su bile poštovane. Političke stranke su usmjerile svoje poruke prema svojim etničkim zajednicama. Iako su kandidati prenosili promotivne poruke o potrebi društveno-ekonomskih reformi, stvaranju radnih mjesta, borbi protiv korupcije i evropskim i euroatlantskim integracijama, njihove kampanje su uglavnom imale negativan ton uz okrivljivanje protivnika za nedostatak napretka. Korištenje zapaljive retorike je primijećeno u zadnjoj sedmici kampanje, uključujući i u društvenim medijima i televizijskim debatama.

Regulatorni sistem finansiranja kampanje nije adekvatan da bi osigurao transparentnost, integritet odgovornost procesa, a većina ranijih preporuka OSCE/ODIHR-a i Grupe država Vijeća Evrope za borbu protiv korupcije (GRECO) ostaju neriješene. Usto, nedostatak privremenih finansijskih izvještaja i dugačak proces njihove revizije sprečava efikasnost postojećih propisa i ostavlja prekršaje neriješenima.

Iako raznoliko, medijsko okruženje je segmentirano po etničkoj liniji. Emiteri su se pridržavali zakonske obaveze da izbornim kandidatima omoguće besplatno programsko vrijeme pod jednakim uslovima i ponudili su biračima priliku da saznaju više o kandidatima kroz debate i emisije o izborima. Međutim, rezultati monitoringa medija koji je provela Izborna posmatračka misija OSCE/ODIHR pokazali su rasprostranjenu pristrasnost emitera.

Pravni lijek je ograničen na one birače i izborne kandidate čija su prava direktno prekršena. Nije zagarantirano prisustvo javnosti pri rješavanju izbornih sporova, što nije u skladu sa članom 12 Kopenhagenskog dokumenta OSCE-a iz 1990. godine. Izbornoj administraciji je podneseno preko 500 prigovora i žalbi, a većina je odbijena, često iz formalnih razloga.

Pravni okvir omogućava da građanski i međunarodni posmatrači, kao i predstavnici izbornih kandidata, posmatraju cijeli izborni proces. U dešavanju koje je pozdravljeno, sedam organizacija civilnog društva je udružilo napore da bi osnovalo koaliciju “Pod lupom” radi obuke i raspoređivanja 3.000 građanskih posmatrača na 1.400 biračkih mjesta.

Dan izbora je protekao generalno uredno, ali su primijećene neke tehničke neregularnosti tokom cijelog dana, uz znatno pogoršanje procesa tokom brojanja glasova. Uprkos kašnjenju u otvaranju biračkih mjesta, posmatrači su ocijenili proces glasanja kao dobar ili veoma dobar na 94% posmatranih biračkih mjesta. Međutim, brojanje glasova je ocijenjeno kao loše ili veoma loše na 25% posmatranih biračkih mjesta kao rezultat nedostatka znanja članova biračkih odbora o procedurama i generalne neorganiziranosti. Indicije o trgovini mjestima u biračkim odborima su potvrđene na dan izbora, kao i neki slučajevi miješanja građanskih i stranačkih posmatrača u sam proces.

Proces izrade zbirnih rezultata u općinskim izbornim komisijama je u početku ocijenjen pozitivno; međutim, transparentnost procesa verifikacije od strane CIK-a je bila ograničena pošto rezultati po biračkim mjestima nisu bili objavljeni sve do 27. oktobra. Nakon ponovnog prebrojavanja glasova na oko 200 biračkih mjesta CIK je objavio konačne rezultate 10. novembra.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Following an invitation from the Central Election Commission (CEC) of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) deployed an election observation mission (EOM) for the 12 October general elections. The OSCE/ODIHR assessed the compliance of the electoral process with OSCE commitments, other international obligations and standards for democratic elections, and with national legislation. For election day, the OSCE/ODIHR EOM joined efforts with delegations from the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe to form an International Election Observation Mission (IEOM).

As reflected in the Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions issued on 13 October 2014, the elections were held in a competitive environment where candidates were able to campaign freely and fundamental freedoms of expression, association and assembly were respected. While the elections were efficiently administered, widespread credible allegations of electoral contestants manipulating the composition of polling station commissions reduced stakeholder confidence in the integrity of the process. In addition, the lack of a shared vision in the country’s future and cooperation among the three constituent peoples continues to hinder the reforms necessary to fully ensure democratic elections. A growing mistrust by citizens in the functioning of the democratic institutions endangers stability.

The citizens of BiH voted in six distinct contests under a complex institutional arrangement within a state separated into two entities: the Federation of BiH (FBiH) and Republika Srpska (RS). At the state level, citizens voted for the BiH Presidency and the BiH House of Representatives. At the entity level, citizens voted for the FBiH House of Representatives, the RS President, Vice President and the RS National Assembly. Ethnic divisions remain determining factors in the country’s political discourse.

The legal framework is generally sufficient for the conduct of democratic elections. Recent amendments met some prior OSCE/ODIHR recommendations, including increasing the gender participation quota to 40 per cent both in election administration and in candidate lists. However, a lack of political will to move beyond the 1995 General Framework Agreement for Peace (Dayton Agreement) means that important and long-standing shortcomings remain. In particular, ethnicity based restrictions on the right to stand and to vote are contrary to OSCE commitments and Council of Europe standards. It is regrettable that this is the second election held in violation of the Sejdić-Finci judgment of the European Court of Human Rights.

The number of votes required for a candidate to be elected in each constituency varies significantly, violating the principle of equality of the vote. The legal requirement to regularly review constituency boundaries and the allocation of mandates has not been met.

The CEC generally administered the elections efficiently and enjoyed confidence among most electoral stakeholders. CEC sessions were open to accredited observers and the media, while a majority of Municipal Election Commissions (MEC) held informal meetings. There were numerous alleged cases that electoral contestants engaged in the trading of Polling Station Commission (PSC) positions to gain greater representation in areas of specific interest. This led to politically unbalanced commissions and reduced trust in their ability to conduct elections without irregularities.

Overall, there was confidence in the accuracy of the Central Voter Register. The number of eligible voters for these elections was 3,278,908. For the first time, voters in the Brčko District had to choose citizenship of one of the two entities to be able to vote. Despite efforts to inform Brčko voters, some were reluctant to declare an entity citizenship. Greater efforts could have been made by the authorities to inform voters of changes to voter identification requirements and to register

internally displaced persons. Several OSCE/ODIHR EOM interlocutors also expressed concerns about the integrity of postal voting.

In a generally inclusive process, the CEC certified 51 political parties, 14 coalitions and 15 independent candidates to compete in the state and entity elections. For the BiH Presidency election, 17 candidates were certified, of whom only one was a woman. For the election of the RS President and Vice Presidents, 19 candidates were certified, of whom two were women. The new

40 per cent gender representation requirement was respected on candidate lists, with women obtaining 19 per cent of the seats in the state and entity legislatures. Provisions for the return of registration deposits are excessive and run contrary to good practice.

All electoral contestants were able to campaign without obstruction and freedoms of association and assembly were respected. Political parties oriented their messages toward their own ethnic communities. While contestants conveyed campaign messages on the necessity for socio-economic reforms, job creation, fighting corruption, and European and Euro-Atlantic integration, their campaigns were largely negative in tone, blaming opponents for the lack of progress. The use of inflammatory language was noted in the last week of the campaign, including in social media and television debates.

The campaign finance regulatory system is not adequate to ensure transparency, integrity and accountability of the process, and a majority of previous OSCE/ODIHR and the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) recommendations remain unaddressed. In addition, the absence of interim reporting and the lengthy auditing process of finance reports negate the effectiveness of existing regulations and leaves violations unaddressed.

While diverse, the media environment is segmented along ethnic lines. Public broadcasters complied with the legal obligation to provide free airtime to electoral contestants on an equal basis and offered voters the opportunity to learn about contestants through debates and election programmes. However, OSCE/ODIHR EOM media monitoring results showed widespread bias in broadcast media.

Legal redress is limited to those voters and electoral contestants whose rights are directly violated. There is no guarantee to a public hearing of electoral disputes, at odds with paragraph 12 of the 1990 OSCE Copenhagen Document. Over 500 complaints and appeals were submitted to the election administration and a vast majority was rejected, often on formalistic grounds.

The legal framework provides for observation of the entire electoral process by citizen and international observers, as well as representatives of electoral contestants. In a welcome development, seven civil society organizations joined efforts to form the coalition Pod Lupom to train and deploy 3,000 citizen observers in 1,400 polling stations.

Election day generally proceeded in an orderly manner, but some technical irregularities were noted throughout the day, with a significant deterioration during the count. Despite delays in the opening of polls, observers assessed the voting process as good or very good in 94 per cent of observed polling stations. The count, however, was assessed as bad or very bad in 25 per cent of observed polling stations as a result of PSC members lacking knowledge of procedures and general disorder. Indications of trading of polling station commission positions were confirmed on election day, as well as some instances of citizen and party observers interfering in the process.

The tabulation process at the MECs was initially assessed positively, however, the transparency of the verification process by the CEC was limited, as results broken down by polling station were not published until 27 October. Following recounts for some 200 polling stations, the CEC publish final results on 10 November.