It was on the basis of the information that he received during his mission to Cambodia that Mr. Surya Subedi, Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia will make his assessment. Information have already been prepared for him by well-financed NGOs, such as The Committee for Free and Fair Election in Cambodia (COMFREL), The National Democratic Institute (NDI)-Cambodia in collaboration with The Neutral and Impartial Committee for Free and Fair Election in Cambodia (NICFEC) and The Cambodian Advanced Study (CAS), known by the English language newspapers in Cambodia as “election monitors” who say nearly a couple months ahead of Mr. Subedi’s scheduled arrival on Sunday 19 May 2013 that the election process “is pitted with irregularities”. Will Mr. Subedi rely on such information without checking whether or not discrepancies exist between different reports? Will he picks and chooses only one major finding in one report that serves his purposes and rips off the other that becomes cumbersome and bothering?
The Cambodia Voter Registry Audit 2013 from NDI-NICFEC-CAS shows that “82.9% of eligible citizens are registered, while COMFREL’s 2013 Survey reveals that “97.7% of eligible voters registered to vote. Some unscrupulous NGO’s admitted that it was a difference, but just a small difference. 14.8% is absolutely not a small difference, and when computed, based on 9,675,453 eligible voters, the difference is 1,431,967 voters. It is easy to conclude that one survey or the other is unreliable and not credible. And it is not difficult to conclude that both surveys are unreliable and not credible. Therefore, what are the other findings of the two surveys mean? Here, the answer is very simple: They are unreliable and not credible. It goes without saying that those “election monitors” who say that the election process “is pitted with irregularities” had to convince Mr. Subedi that their information is the best in town he can find. It is Mr. Subedi’s own prerogatives to allow himself to be convinced by unreliable and not credible findings, if he so chooses.
Concerning the elections and the electoral process in Cambodia, below are the quotes from Mr. Subedi’s own writing:
“Cambodia has made significant progress since the conclusion of the Agreements, passing various milestones in strengthening democracy, human rights and the rule of law. It has held four national or parliamentary elections and three local or commune elections. The latest round of commune elections was held on 3 June 2012.” ……..
“More generally, since the first elections, in 1993, the Government and electoral institutions have greatly increased their knowledge and strengthened their ability to organize elections. The Special Rapporteur is pleased to report that civil servants working in Government ministries, the National Election Committee, other State institutions and civil society all demonstrate an extremely good understanding of the laws and practices governing the electoral process in Cambodia.”
In light of these assessments, with more and more Cambodian people becoming better educated, improving their standard of living, getting out of poverty, why doesn’t Mr. Subedi abandon his seemed-to-be political agenda to cause discord inside the Cambodian society and allow the election process to evolve naturally towards full democratization? If it is not broken, why fix it?
17 May 2013
Professor Pen Ngoeun
Advisor
University of Puthisastra, Phnom Penh, Cambodia