Asean needs electoral standards before it can become a community

In the absence of an environment conducive to the freedom of assembly, association and expression of all the people (including all ethnic groups and political parties) inside Burma, any move towards holding elections - given the standards outlined in the Inter Parliamentary Union's "Free and Fair Elections" - would be a farce.

Is there any hope of putting into place the required minimum international standards before holding the Burmese election next year?

To ensure the successful outcome of the Asean Summit in Cha-am it is imperative to review all existing electoral standards within Asean.

The Burmese situation underscores the need for minimum standards to be met before holding an election. The Asean leaders (elected, nominated or appointed) must realise that a peaceful and unified Asean Community as envisaged in the charter requires systems that uphold international norms and standards on free and fair elections. There is an urgent need for collaboration among the Asean Secretariat, Asean governments and regional civil society groups in developing, strengthening and maintaining electoral processes that are free and fair within member countries.

Most Asean governments are averse to civil society groups raising the issue of electoral standards because it reflects the ongoing poor practice of undemocratic governance lacking transparency and accountability in selecting parliaments. Apparently Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia have developed better electoral mechanisms by setting up independent bodies such as election commissions (the EC, Comelec and KPU), to oversee and monitor elections.

The other Asean countries do not have independent institutions dealing with electoral processes. These countries use political parties (Cambodia), the military (Burma) and government bodies (Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and Laos) to influence electoral compositions, administration and functions. Thus they lack neutrality and transparency.

At this juncture, the Asean grouping has been perceived as a backward one because the member countries cannot step further beyond their traditional rules, regulations and beliefs. With a huge uneducated population within Asean, lots of poor and economically underprivileged voters cast their ballots according to monetary benefits (vote-buying) offered to them or under duress of personal threat and harm. Doubtless, unqualified politicians are elected who have subsequently ignored their constituencies. Indeed, they have made a mockery of the motto "Democracy of the people, by the people and for the people."

It is well known that Asean governments generally have little tolerance for these democratic ideals and hardly permit people and media to directly participate in the political discourse at the grass-roots and national levels. In some form or other, there is curtailment of the freedom of expression, assembly and association. The system of checks and balances is only practised marginally in a few Asean countries that have a minimum of respect for a free media.

Over the past decade, voters throughout the world have become aware of the role played by election monitoring organisations (EMOs) and international observers. But Asean members such as Singapore, Vietnam, Laos, Brunei and Burma are still hostile to EMOs, refusing to allow them to observe and monitor local polls.

The EMOs have inspired citizens, including minority and vulnerable groups, to want to increase participation in public affairs and transform electoral processes into transparent and accountable ones. Local and international monitoring organisations have emerged in the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia and Malaysia, and their activities have included review of election laws and voter education. They even engage in post-election observation and monitoring activities that promote good governance, and monitor government projects to minimise if not eliminate corruption.

But only half of the Asean members have ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which enshrines the principle of elections. Article 25 of the ICCPR clearly identifies the right and opportunity of people to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives. It also stipulates the right to vote and to be elected in genuine periodic elections that shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electorate.

Do all of the Asean governments and their election commissions uphold this principle?