Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-04-Speech-3-197"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030604.6.3-197"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". Madam President, as Parliament knows, Nigeria went through an important test of its stability and of its democratic development in the election cycle of April and May. We in the European Commission supported these elections through an assistance programme of EUR 6.5 million which went to the Independent National Election Commission, directed at the education of voters and which supported domestic observation organisations.
We note that President Obasanjo – who was sworn in on 29 May 2003 – and his party have greatly strengthened their electoral position in the country. While the President remains an important partner for us, we will have to keep an eye on the development of pluralism in Nigeria's democracy.
I would like to say one other thing. The Election Observation Missions that we support, invariably under the leadership of Members of this House, are one of the most important ways in which we provide practical assistance for the development and strengthening of democracy around the world. They are one of the most practical ways in which we improve governance, not least in poorer developing countries. But it is imperative that the integrity of the process and of what we are trying to do is maintained. I decline to take the view that we should hedge the conclusions of our Election Observation Missions around with political considerations.
Once we are seen to be politicising this process, it will cease to carry any weight and frankly will cease to be the valuable instrument it is at the moment for the development and enhancement of democracy. However convenient it may seem to some to bowdlerise the conclusions of missions, however inconvenient it may seem to some to tell the truth about what experienced observers have seen on the ground, we have to be absolutely clear on every occasion that our Election Observation Missions have the job of telling it as it is. We have as good a record as anyone in this area and I would not want to see us detract from that by one centimetre.
Once again I would like to pay a tribute to the honourable Member and to all those who worked with him. They have done an outstanding job and I hope that the House will continue to provide equally effective heads for these missions in the years ahead.
At the same time we deployed an Election Observation Mission. The mission has concluded its operation in Nigeria and I am delighted that Mr van den Berg will be able to present his findings to Parliament here today.
I thanked the chief observer in a press statement I made on 5 May 2003. I am glad to repeat here today what I said in that statement. The head of the mission and his team did an extremely professional job. We thank the honourable Member and his colleagues for the dedicated way in which they completed this exceptionally difficult task. I would also like to thank Mrs Junker, who represented the European Parliament delegation.
The Election Observation Mission dealt formidably with the challenges of a long deployment, the challenges of working in a large and complex country, and the challenge as well of dealing with three difficult election days.
The elections did not trigger the widespread violence which had been feared by many. I shall say straightaway that this was a relief to all of us and is the best news to come out of these election campaigns. The absence of violence is a necessary, but not, as the philosophers might put it, a sufficient condition for democratic elections.
What the European Union Election Observation Mission saw was, as Parliament will know, disappointing. There was serious fraud in many states, there were various irregularities in others and overall there were systemic problems like unreliable voters’ registers, a lack of secrecy and insufficient safeguards against double voting. Those were some of the sad features of these elections.
The reactions of the government and the national election commission have likewise been disappointing. Instead of verifying and addressing shortcomings, they criticised our Election Observation Mission. They did not question reported facts, but rather said they were questioning the mission’s cultural understanding of those facts.
Explaining electoral fraud as the result of cultural differences seems both far-fetched and self-defeating. Furthermore, it has been proved on other occasions that, despite problems, relatively transparent elections can be held in Africa. We saw that, for example, in Kenya last December.
It is important to note that the findings of domestic observer groups, which had deployed almost 50 000 observers covering one third of all polling stations, were very similar to those of the European Union's Election Observation Mission."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples