|
Special Article
New Delhi, 30 April 2015
Witnessing Sudanese
Elections
By Geetartha Pathak
(Former Member, Press
Council of India)
The western world may dismiss the results of the recent
parliamentary elections held in Sudan
as not free and fair, but President Omar-al Bashir is all set to rule the
country for the next five years. On April 27, the Election Commission declared
him re-elected with 94 per cent of the vote (5,242,000 votes). His National
Congress Party (NCP) won 323 of 426 parliamentary seats.
As part of a team of international election observers, one made
every effort to assess the sturdiness of the electoral process, the
participation level of the people in the elections and the overall prevailing
situation. Along with my colleague, I toured different parts of the country
extensively and visited a number of polling centers across the states. Polling,
in all the centers that we visited was peaceful, the election process fair and
held in a regular manner. Interestingly, we found that women were more
enthusiastic, though the voter turnout was poor, picking up only on the last
day. With other observers, we also visited the St. Francis School polling centre, which was particularly
heavily secured as Omar al-Bashir along with other top leaders of the
government cast their votes.
While former Vice President of Sudan and a parliamentary
candidate Elhaj Adam told us that the participation of people in these
elections would not be less than during the parliamentary elections held in
2010, many others gave us the impression that it wouldn’t be the case. They
were unhappy over non-participation of major political parties and chose to
stay away.
Even if there is a strong anti-incumbency factor against Bashir’s
regime, there are no visible faces in the opposition to challenge him. This is perhaps
another reason for the comparatively low voter turnout this time. The banned
Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N), military wing of Sudan
People’s Liberation Movement opposition party, had at the start of the polls
shelled rockets on major towns in South Kordofan state in an attempt to disrupt
the polls. It also seized ballot boxes in the conflict-torn southern state
earlier this month in an effort to sabotage the elections. However, the foreign
ministry renewed Sudan’s
commitment to go ahead with the national dialogue initiative following
announcement of the poll results and formation of the new government.
The final turnout for this election was put at 46.4 per
cent, (out of the 13 million, about six million voted), by the Election
Commission, better than 42 per cent in last month’s General election in Nigeria. This,
despite the main opposition parties deciding not to contest the polls, which
made little difference to Bashir. Rather, it seems he was happy with their
decision and immediately strategized the future course of action. He went ahead
with the elections and the 44 ‘insignificant’ political parties which
participated made it easier for him to legitimize his rule for the next five
years.
But for the outside world, it was yet another controversial
election post 2010, with the main opposition parties, including Sadiq
al-Mahdi's National Umma Party, Hassan al-Turabi's Popular Congress Party and
parts of the Democratic Unionist Party, boycotting it. The parties had demanded
postponement till a coalition government was put in place to oversee a ‘free
and fair election.’ However, an adamant Bashir government paid no heed to the
opposition’s plea. Apart from President’s post, the voters also elected 425
members of Parliament and 2,235 members of state legislative councils.
In the 2010 elections, International electoral observers
especially from the European Union had claimed that the elections ‘were not
free and fair’. This time the EU chose not to send observers apprehending
adverse electoral environment in the country. Nevertheless, there were 221
international observers, mainly from African Union, Arab League, Organization
of Islamic Countries and few other countries, including India. Nine
international observers, including two of us from the Indian Journalists’ Union, were from the journalist community.
Bashir, who had captured power through a bloodless coup in
1989, has ruled this North African country by first banning all other political
parties except his own, National Congress Party. He held the first multi-party
elections in Sudan
immediately after the International Criminal Court on March 4, 2009 issued
arrest warrants against him for the genocide in Darfur,
where the aboriginal ethnic tribes were at loggerheads over resources with Arab
nomadic groups allegedly supported by the state. Apart from Darfur, South
Kordofan and Blue Nile are the two other major conflict-ridden states in Sudan. Bashir’s
controversial rule has sparked violent clashes between government troops and
armed opposition groups active in these conflict areas.
Bashir has ruled Sudan for a quarter century. His reign
is not expected to be affected by the International Criminal Court’s warrant as
the latter halted its probe in December, citing a need to
“shift resources to other urgent cases.” The country, however, received a jolt
when it lost two-third of the oil rich fields after Christian majority South Sudan seceded following a referendum in 2011. Sudan’s economy now heavily depends upon the
taxes and other duties imposed on crude oil and other produces transited from
South Sudan to the Red Sea port.
Soon after the elections were over, a statement by the US, the UK
and Norway criticized “Sudan's failure
to create a free, fair, and conducive elections environment", concluding
that “the outcome of these elections cannot be considered a credible expression
of the will of the Sudanese people”. The Sudan’s foreign ministry has taken
strong umbrage to it and summoned their ambassadors terming the statement as “a
blatant interference in the country’s affairs”, and accusing them of
deliberately ignoring rebels’ shelling of South Kordofan during the elections.
Sarah Nouwen, an international law expert at the University of Cambridge, commented: “These elections
may decide something, but do not resolve anything. Indeed, they have deepened
the current political crises by intensifying mistrust: mistrust among political
parties, mistrust among the country's centre and its peripheries, and mistrust
between political parties and their supposed constituencies.”
Whether the western countries accept the recent poll result
of Sudan
or not, Bashir has manipulated the mandate and he is heading to rule the
country for next five years. However, to assert the legitimacy of the mandate,
Bashir will need to work towards resolving the country's ongoing conflicts,
particularly in Darfur, South Kordofan and the Blue Nile
states, which have resulted in large numbers of civilian deaths and
displacement.
Additionally, he would do well by not looking at the media
suspiciously. Media freedom has been suppressed often for being critical of his
regime. Thus, in our report to the Sudan Election Commission, we expressed
concern for infringement of media rights and freedom (Reporters Without
Boarders has Sudan
in 174th place in press freedom list of 2015 out of 180 countries). We
urged the government to allow the media to carry out its duties and
responsibilities fearlessly, as it would strengthen democracy in Sudan. It is
critical for its people, friendly and very hospitable, to grow in this conflict-ridden
North African Arabic country.---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|
