So the last few days have been a press of facts and procedures, followed by the visceral thrill of crowds and flags, insults and promises. The campaign period now is officially over.
At the briefing, the speakers emphasized three major points:
The rains create huge logistical challenges. For example, in the presidential elections the UN moved polling materials into 35 polling centers by helicopter. Following this wet spell, the urgent request for helicopter support to reach an additional 51, newly cut-off, sites have been issued, with 21 already approved. By the speaker’s estimation, 20% of all sites will now be serviced by helicopters. There is currently a big push to find new routes, scramble UN (M18) and ISF choppers, organize observers to fly with the materials, etc.
Second, the speakers underscored the redoubled need to build confidence in the counting process in light of the amended electoral law, which moved the counting process from the polling stations to district centers, effectively decreasing the number of counting sites from 708 to 13. The essential problem, as one official put it, is not the security of the ballots – the UN believes that sufficient steps are being taken to secure the movement of the ballot boxes – but the perception of their security.
For me this issue is a bit broader. In this election, it will be impossible to give the voter the same, unfiltered, experience of seeing his or her vote counted. The challenge is to develop procedures that can satisfy the minimum level of access and transparency that was established in the presidential elections – a high standard which now, for better or worse, shapes voters’ expectations and perceptions of legitimacy. As the UN Elections Certification Team stated in their seventh report: “It is unlikely that such a level of transparency [as established in the presidential elections], or quite possibly even a minimally acceptable level of transparency, will be able to be achieved at district counting” (my emphasis). There is a problem with not only perceptions, but potentially also with meeting basic international standards.
Finally, these elections are more complex and, considering the power of parliament relative to the presidency, more important than the presidential rounds. These are high stakes, high energy, and potentially high-risk elections. I am looking forward to Saturday.
* United Nation Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste, United Nations Development Program, International Stabilization Forces, and IFES (formerly International Foundation for Electoral Systems).
** While Timor-Leste has used the district counting system in the past, the problem in this cycle is “changing horses in midstream.”
*** From p. 7, paragraph 13. The UN Elections Certification Team goes on to call the amendment “a major retrograde step, substantially diminishing both the perceived and actual transparency of the counting process, and thereby running the risk of significantly compromising the main source of trust in the results.”