VZCZCXRO7442
PP RUEHDBU RUEHLN RUEHVK RUEHYG
DE RUEHYE #1384/01 3320424
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 280424Z NOV 07
FM AMEMBASSY YEREVAN
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 6683
INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHAK/AMEMBASSY ANKARA PRIORITY 1382
RUEHIT/AMCONSUL ISTANBUL PRIORITY 0609
RUEHLMC/MILLENIUM CHALLENGE CORPORATION WASHINGTON DC
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO 0460

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 06 YEREVAN 001384 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR EUR/CARC 
 
E.O.12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL KDEM KJUS AM
SUBJECT:  MIXED, LARGELY SANGUINE REACTIONS TO ARMENIA'S ELECTORAL 
CODE CHANGES 
 
 
YEREVAN 00001384  001.2 OF 006 
 
 
------- 
SUMMARY 
------- 
 
¶1. (SBU) With the presidential election set for February, parliament 
swiftly enacted electoral code changes that took effect November 20. 
 Over the course of two day-long readings, the parliament amended 
almost one third of the articles of Armenia's electoral code.  IFES 
and other election monitoring bodies told Emboffs that the 
amendments contain both positive and disconcerting elements.  As 
IFES and local observer groups had advocated, the parliament 
eliminated a proposed amendment that would have placed limitations 
on international and domestic election observation missions. 
Ex-president and now current presidential contender Levon 
Ter-Petrossian saw his recent vocal bid to include two anti-vote 
fraud amendments testily rejected by the head of the Central 
Electoral Commission.  End summary. 
 
------------------------------- 
MAJOR CHANGES TO ELECTORAL CODE 
------------------------------- 
 
¶2. (U) Major changes to the electoral code include abolishing of 
presidential nominations by multi-party blocs  or by civic 
initiative (signature collection); temporarily allowing voters to 
vote in the area where they physically reside (instead of only at 
their officially registered address); stamping of voters' passports; 
changing polling stations' layout for greater voter privacy; and 
requiring only one interim financial report by candidates 10 days 
after the beginning of the electoral campaign (two reports had been 
proposed in the first reading).  The parliament eliminated a 
proposed amendment from the first reading that would have prevented 
Armenian citizens from registering as foreign observers, and 
foreigners from registering as local observers. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
1/3 OF ELECTORAL CODE AMENDED IN ONLY TWO READINGS 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
 
¶3. (U) On November 5 the Armenian parliament passed in its first 
reading legislation to amend 47 of the 141 articles making up the 
electoral code.  The ruling Republican Party of Armenia, and its 
coalition partner, Prosperous Armenia, drafted the amendments, aided 
by input from international organizations (the USAID-funded IFES 
project on electoral assistance, the Organization of Security and 
Cooperation in Europe, and ABA/CEELI) as well as the country's 
Central Electoral Commission (CEC) and local NGOs such as "It's Your 
Choice."  In its second and final reading on November 16, parliament 
adopted (by the tally of 86 yes, 0 no, and 11 abstentions) 45 
amendments to the code, which President Kocharian signed into law on 
November 20. 
 
¶4. (SBU) The content of the amendments had been the source of months 
of speculation, dating back to the May 2007 parliamentary elections. 
 The OSCE stated that while those elections "demonstrated 
improvement" over previous polls and "generally met international 
standards," significant shortcomings still existed, notably in 
campaign regulation and performance of election commissions during 
vote counts.  The OSCE also noted as problems the blurring of the 
ruling party with the government; the elections complaints and 
appeals process (due to inconsistencies in Armenia's legal 
framework); and the lack of sanctions for election violations. 
According to Tigran Torosian, speaker of the parliament, the aim of 
the newly enacted amendments is to eliminate shortcomings 
encountered during the May parliamentary elections. 
 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
MIXED THOUGH LARGELY SANGUINE REACTIONS TO AMENDMENTS 
--------------------------------------------- -------- 
 
¶5. (SBU) Most of the opposition's attention on the changes has been 
focused on the amendment that abolishes the nomination of 
presidential candidates by multi-party blocs or civic initiative 
(signature collection).  From now on, only political parties or 
candidates themselves can nominate a candidate, while party blocs or 
unregistered coalitions cannot.  (Comment:  The point here is that 
no more than one party name can appear next to each candidate's name 
on the ballot paper whereas a candidate who had successfully rallied 
a broad opposition coalition to support him would prefer to be 
listed as the chosen nominee of all of these opposition parties, 
with each party name enumerated on the ballots.  This amounts to a 
small blow against opposition unity.  End comment.) 
 
¶6. (U) Others expressed concerns about the proposal to double the 
election registration deposit by a presidential candidate from 5 
 
YEREVAN 00001384  002.2 OF 006 
 
 
million drams (approximately USD 15,600) to 10 million, and raise 
the limit of maximum election spending by a candidate from 70 
million drams (USD 220,000) to 140 million.  While the government 
would return the election deposit to candidates who receive over 
five percent of the vote, critics protested the financial impediment 
to poorly-funded candidates.  In the end, the parliament lowered the 
deposit amount to 8 million drams (approximately USD 25,000) and 
kept the maximum spending limit by presidential candidates to 70 
million drams. 
 
------------------------------------------ 
IFES, OTHERS SEES PROS, CONS IN AMENDMENTS 
------------------------------------------ 
 
¶7. (SBU) IFES, a USAID grantee that provides technical assistance on 
election processes, has worked closely with the authorities on 
reforming the electoral code, and had proposed 17 short-term 
changes, as well as a mix of medium and long-term changes for after 
the election.  Its country director, Chedomir Flego, told poloff 
November 8 that he was pleased to see ten of IFES' proposed 
amendments in the first reading, but was caught off guard by the 
total number of tabled amendments.  Flego cautioned that some of 
these changes warranted a serious discussion that the short time 
frame before the election did not permit.  He also expressed concern 
over Armenian authorities' tendency before elections to "bulldoze" 
controversial changes into law. 
 
¶8. (SBU) IFES characterized the following changes to the electoral 
code as disconcerting or positive, and flagged issues that should 
have been addressed but were not (see paragraph 9 for a more 
detailed discussion of these points): 
 
A) Disconcerting: 
 
- Continued functioning of electoral commissions when some members 
terminate their participation early (seen as anti-opposition); 
 
- Stamping of ballot envelope and voter's passport by polling 
officer responsible for the ballot box. 
 
B) Positive/benign: 
 
- A temporary measure allowing voter registration at physical place 
of habitation instead of at legally registered residence (IFES had 
wanted to see this made permanent); 
 
- Removing the initially proposed amendment that would have 
prevented Armenian citizens from registering as foreign observers, 
and foreign citizens from registering as local observers; 
 
- A measure that allows the Central Election Commission (CEC) to 
receive from the appropriate government agency, at ten and three 
days prior to an election, an updated number of voters per electoral 
district and precinct (this will facilitate a more accurate 
allotment of ballot papers and voting envelopes provided to Precinct 
Electoral Commissions); 
 
- CEC will now be able to regulate paid political advertising aired 
on public television and radio.  Before, CEC could only regulate 
free political advertising aired on public radio and television (CEC 
will be able to limit any one candidate seeking to purchase 
disproportionate airtime); 
 
- Several campaign finance amendments:  a) one required an interim 
financial report ten days after the beginning of the electoral 
campaign that candidates themselves must now submit in addition to 
parties and party alliances (IFES had pushed for two interim reports 
at 15 and 5 days before the election, and had wished they contained 
more detailed reporting than the amendment calls for); b) three days 
provided for a CEC-appointed Audit Service to check candidates' 
campaign finances before forwarding them to the CEC for discussion; 
 
- Discontinuing the counting of ballot envelopes. 
 
C) Amendments/issues that IFES thought should have been included but 
were omitted or removed after the readings: 
 
- Reporting of third party financial contributions to campaigns; 
 
- Increasing a) the audit report period, i.e., the time period for 
checking declarations of candidates' campaign finances and b) the 
time of the Audit Service's operational authority, from 20 and 45 
days following the announcement of election results, to 45 and 60 
days respectively; 
 
 
YEREVAN 00001384  003.2 OF 006 
 
 
- Definition of campaign finance; 
 
- Addressing the lack of campaign finance sanctions; 
 
- Addressing the lack of consistency between the Electoral Code and 
other Armenian legal statutes. 
 
¶9. (SBU) A more thorough analysis of IFES's views on certain points 
follows. 
 
A) Disconcerting: 
 
- Stamping voters' passports before they are allowed to deposit 
their ballot envelopes in the ballot box:  This measure is in one 
sense welcome as an attempt to deter multiple voting by an 
individual voter, however the measure has its critics.  The Council 
of Europe's Venice Commission opposes stamping of 
passports/identification documents that disclose whether citizens 
vote.  For instance, citizens may (theoretically) subsequently be 
discriminated against when receiving social benefits depending on 
whether or not they voted.  (Comment:  According to IFES, the 
Republican and Prosperous Armenia parties were initially against the 
amendment, but withdrew their objection to placate the Dashnak 
party, their coalition partner.  End comment.)  Also, on technical 
grounds, it would have made more sense if voters were 
checked/stamped by the registering polling officer prior to the 
issuance of the ballot.  Opposition parties (most notably former 
President Ter-Petrossian) had called for finger-inking; though IFES 
opposes finger-inking as unreliable and creating a false sense of 
security, since chemicals are readily available that can instantly 
remove finger ink. 
 
- Electoral Commission Members Early Termination:  Amendment could 
be used against commission members appointed by opposition parties. 
It allows the election commissions to continue their work until the 
number of commission members drops to five in case of early 
termination of other commission members.  There is a fear that this 
amendment might be misused by ruling parties to dominate elections 
commission work during elections if they somehow get rid of 
commission members appointed by opposition parties (through 
political pressure or bribes).  (Comment:  There is some reasoning 
behind the provision, however, given the opposition's past history 
of boycotting election commissions' work, although this did not 
happen in May 2007. End Comment.) 
 
B) Positive/benign: 
 
- Place of voter registration:  This was a potential cause of fraud 
in past elections.  The difficulty of changing one's permanent 
address registration (or "propiska," which is a Soviet-legacy 
registration practice), as well as the high number of registered 
voters who have emigrated to Russia has meant that the voters' lists 
contained perhaps 300,000 voters who could be counted on not to show 
up on Election Day.  This amendment would at least fix the problem 
for Armenians still residing in the country (most often those who 
have moved to Yerevan from outlying districts), allowing people to 
temporarily remove themselves from the voting list of their 
permanently registered address so they can vote in the communities 
where they actually reside.  IFES says the only shortfall is that it 
is a temporary provision, and that it should be made permanent. 
Also, there is no permanent provision ensuring that the temporary 
removal of names from voting lists, and additions to those that are 
gaining new voters, would be made public.  (Note:  Republican Party 
board member Samvel Nikoyan, a key proponent of the amendments, has 
publicly stated that the amended voting lists would be made public. 
End note.) 
 
- Discontinuing the counting of ballot envelopes:  Envelope counting 
had been a burdensome and time-consuming requirement for fatigued 
poll workers to complete after close of polls.  IFES said this 
practice did not make sense, that counting ballots was more 
important.  In the past, electoral commissions could disqualify a 
ballot if the envelope was damaged (even if the ballot's integrity 
remained). 
 
- New restriction on observers was deleted after the first reading: 
The CEC had apparently copied verbatim an OSCE recommendation - 
contained in the OSCE/OHDIR Election Observation Mission Report on 
Armenia's May 2007 parliamentary elections - that excludes local 
staff of international organizations from observation.  According to 
this draft amendment, a local staff person could not be accredited 
as an international observer, nor could he apply to be a local 
observer under that same organization, because the organization for 
which s/he works is registered as an international organization in 
Armenia.  Flego was surprised and chagrined this restriction showed 
 
YEREVAN 00001384  004.2 OF 006 
 
 
up in an OSCE document.  He felt the restriction's intent was to 
limit observation and control the composition of the observer groups 
so critics could be preemptively weeded out.  Flego said he 
personally pleaded with Republican Party board member Samvel Nikoyan 
and parliament's State and Legal Affairs Committee Chairman David 
Harutyunyan for this provision to be dropped.  He said Nikoyan had 
been very encouraging about getting this provision deleted, which 
was borne out in the second reading when the provision was removed 
altogether.  This issue was also a particular concern for the 
domestic observer group "It's Your Choice," a USAID grantee which 
utilized Diasporan Armenians as observers.  (Comment:  We were less 
exercised than IFES or IYC about the significance of this point, in 
the great scheme of Armenian democracy, but it is nice that IFES 
chalked up a win.  End comment.) 
 
- Campaign finance amendments:  Candidates will now have to furnish 
one interim financial report on their campaign expenditures ten days 
after the election campaign begins.  Previously, only political 
parties or political blocs had to submit the reports.  Also, IFES 
unsuccessfully pushed to get more time after the elections (45 days 
instead of 20) for the Audit Service, which is appointed by the CEC 
for the elections, to assess candidates' financial campaign 
documents, and 60 days (vice 45) to exercise its oversight 
authority.  Flego said requirements for even more detailed 
expenditure reporting are still missing, however. 
 
- Nominations for presidential election changed from civic 
initiative to self-nomination (party nomination retained):  IFES 
says this measure will actually allow more individuals to run for 
president, and that nominees will still be able (after nominating 
themselves) to refer to the political bloc that supports them. 
 
- Voter lists :  They are in much better shape since the police took 
over their administration in 2005.  IFES has worked with the 
receptive deputy chief of police to eliminate duplicate names and 
the names of deceased to avoid voting fraud.  Previously, local 
communities prepared voter lists, which resulted in multiple 
registrations and sporadic updating, as well as the potential for 
deliberate administrative chicanery at the municipal level.  Now 
that the system is centralized, with better links between the 
relevant authorities and databases, there has been greater and more 
regular information exchanged.  A major issue remains, however, in 
access to the list for the public and political parties.  Flego said 
acquiring the lists is still difficult -- they are posted only on 
the web twice a year, and public oversight is the loser. 
 
C) Amendments/issues that should have been included: 
 
- Third party reporting of financial contributions to campaigns: 
IFES says there is no definition of third parties in Armenian law as 
relates to elections, thus the government cannot begin to regulate 
this issue.  This is a problem, because powerful businessmen and 
oligarchs can contribute significant resources to campaigns without 
any public oversight.  (Comment:  We differed with IFES on whether 
it was ever realistic to address such a complex and far-reaching 
issue as campaign finance reform during this short season between 
the parliamentary and presidential elections.  These issues can be 
taken up as longer-term reforms after February.  End comment.) 
 
- Definition of campaign finance:  There as yet exists no clear 
definition of what constitutes legal/illegal campaign finance.  This 
situation fosters a system of abuse and corruption that tarnishes 
the legitimacy of elections. 
 
- Addressing the lack of campaign finance sanctions:  Currently 
there are no clearly defined sanctions for candidates or parties 
that violate election rules.  This environment results in political 
campaigns that act with impunity. 
 
- Addressing the lack of consistency between the Electoral Code and 
other Armenian legal statutes:  There are no clear guidelines on 
which legal entity has jurisdiction on election-related crimes. 
With a criminal code, an electoral code and a code on administrative 
violations, the legal framework does not offer quick, efficient 
recourse for investigating and adjudicating violations.  IFES says 
that after the May parliamentary elections political parties went to 
the wrong courts to pursue their complaints, or didn't exhaust all 
of the legal rights available to them. 
 
------------------------------------------ 
OSCE AND "IT'S YOUR CHOICE" ON THE CHANGES 
------------------------------------------ 
 
¶10. (SBU) Emboffs spoke with Harutyun Hambardzumyan, the director of 
"It's Your Choice," a USG grantee local NGO that has also worked on 
 
YEREVAN 00001384  005.2 OF 006 
 
 
the electoral code reforms.  Hambardzumyan said on November 21 that 
he saw both good as well as "ineffectual" amendments in the adopted 
changes.  He said some new amendments simply removed what had been 
introduced in January 2007, (in the run-up to the May parliamentary 
elections).  He also took offense to the parliament's swift 
introduction and passage of the amendments without first having a 
public debate on them.  That said, he found the passport stamp a 
positive anti-fraud measure to deter multiple voting by individuals. 
 He said the introduction of this into the Armenian military last 
May prevented soldiers from voting multiple times, as he alleged 
they did in the past. 
 
¶11. (SBU) He also was upbeat about the amendment that moves the 
voting booth at polling places so voters' backs will be toward a 
wall instead of toward polling personnel and other people in 
attendance.  This, he said, will give voters much more privacy and 
help protect the integrity of the vote by orienting the voting booth 
partition to obstruct unwanted observation.  He also saluted the 
amendment that specifies simplified procedures for vote count and 
protocol tabulations that he thinks will deter unlawful vote 
tabulations.   Polfsn also spoke with Ruzanna Baghdasaryan, the OSCE 
officer in Yerevan in charge of elections, who assessed the changes 
as being positive overall.  She admitted, however, that "some 
things" are still not completely solved.  She disagreed with 
Hambardzumyan on the merits of passport stamping, calling it 
useless, and a tactic to throw "dust in the eyes" of the opposition. 
 She said corrupt polling place officials could get around this by 
simply not stamping the passport (thereby allowing the person to 
vote again), or would conveniently not see the stamp of someone who 
had already voted (though of course this latter scenario would leave 
passports double-stamped, a trail of evidence that might leave the 
bearer uncomfortable). 
 
------------------------------------ 
PUBLIC SPAT BETWEEN LTP AND CEC HEAD 
------------------------------------ 
 
¶12. (SBU) While most opposition parties have spoken out against the 
elimination of presidential nomination by political blocs, 
ex-President and current presidential candidate Levon Ter-Petrossian 
(LTP) has focused his attention on adopting two key anti-fraud 
measures:  the printing of ballots abroad, and inking voters' 
fingers after voting.  In the second political rally LTP held on 
November 16, he claimed that the May parliamentary elections were 
the "most disgraceful in Armenia's history" because of the 
"ingenuity" he claims the authorities used to falsify the vote.  LTP 
also declared that Western-led monitoring of the presidential vote 
will be "meaningless" if the National Assembly did not pass his 
proposed amendments.  LTP shared these concerns with six European 
Ambassadors and Peter Semneby, the EU's special representative to 
the South Caucasus, at a lunch the ambassadors hosted for LTP on 
November 20. 
 
¶13. (SBU) LTP's anti-fraud proposals elicited a sharp retort from 
Garegin Azarian, chairman of the Central Election Commission, who 
alleged that the ex-president himself had rigged elections while in 
power.  Azarian stated that LTP "had better address his suggestions 
to election falsifiers in his entourage."  Azarian's remarks 
elicited a stern rebuke from another political figure, the leader of 
the small opposition party with which Azarian was affiliated until 
¶2002. RFE/RL quoted Petros Makeyan, leader of the pro-LTP Democratic 
Fatherland Party, as saying Azarian, who headed a precinct election 
commission in Yerevan during parliamentary and presidential 
elections held in 1995 and 1996, had never - at the time Azarian was 
directly involved - alleged vote rigging during Ter-Petrossian's 
rule.  Azarian also allegedly told Makeyan in 1998 that Robert 
Kocharian's election as president was fraudulent.  According to 
Makeyan, Azarian "was the one who showed how ballots were stuffed in 
Robert Kocharian's favor."  A CEC spokeswoman responded to Makeyan's 
charges by saying Azarian would comment on them in the future. 
 
------- 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶14. (SBU) As expected, changes to Armenia's electoral code three 
months before a contested presidential election have resulted in 
minor, tit-for-tat exchanges between the ruling parties that 
proposed them, and opposition factions that had no real say.  While 
room for considerable improvement remains, particularly in campaign 
finance, many of the practical changes respond to deficiencies 
highlighted by the parliamentary elections, and represent steps in 
the right direction.  We were surprised, but encouraged, that the 
package moved so expediently through parliament, given the very 
short time before the presidential election, the challenges of 
 
YEREVAN 00001384  006.2 OF 006 
 
 
drafting revised implementing regulations, and training election 
workers on the changes.  On balance, the current package of reforms 
(though less than our more absolutist friends in IFES might wish) 
looks like a good thing. 
 
PENNINGTON