Disagreements for electoral reform

When everyone believed that it would be finalized by May 15th, which is the deadline for the reform, the conclusion of today’s meeting is that both parties are accusing each other of not respecting the agreement.

The debated spurred on only one article that is about the right of parties to open the electoral material boxes.

Damian Gjiknuri: For article 116 of the draft, we have agreed that the electoral material boxes should not be opened, unless for some special causes. We have a list of these causes at paragraph 6 of this article, which allows the boxes to be opened at the Central Election Commission of the appealing process. These gentlemen denied it today, very suddenly, and I am very disappointed because it is not the text on which we agreed.

Oerd Bylykbashi: There is a formulation that changes the reached consensus, and makes an essential change to a moment of compromise that aims maximal improve of the ballot counting process. It would create a very big problem. Today, 4500 boxes of electoral materials are opened by 66 zonal commissions, dividing the workload. And then we con open them with an appeal at the Central Election Commission, which would ruin the appealing process and would create extreme delays.

Damian Gjiknuri: We had agreed on this, and we even have the electronic communications of the Commission members. The Commission has been having this text for one week. Today, the Democratic Party suddenly withdrew. We don’t understand why this happened. Is it a tactical position for breaking a reached consensus? Either this variant will be accepted as it is, or we will see another variant. It is impossible to not open the electoral materials even when there are causes for identifying violations. This is unacceptable. It is like closing the documentation and destroys transparency.

Oerd Bylykbashi: What’s wrong is the inclusion of this formula in an irregular way at the Commission. I believe that the expert can reformulate it soon.

Top Channel