MEPs help build bridges to democracy

Date: 25/09/1997

By Rory Watson

THIS month's municipal elections in Bosnia highlighted the increasing role played by the European Parliament in laying the foundations of democracy in the post-Cold War era.

Among the many international observers deployed by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) was a small group of five MEPs, led by German Christian Democrat Doris Pack, assisted by three officials.

During the two-day elections, the team visited polling stations in 26 municipalities, including politically significant sites such as Sarajevo and Banja Luka, to determine whether voting was running smoothly and fairly and to try to iron out any difficulties.

“This is a very worthwhile activity for the European Parliament. It is important that we are seen by people on the ground and that we can see things for ourselves. It is one of our finest opportunities to make foreign policy,” explained Pack.

The Bosnian exercise is just the latest example of MEP-participation in a tradition which goes back to 1987 when Euro MPs first observed elections in Surinam, and which came to greater prominence with the collapse of Communism.

Although the Parliament's presence is invariably small compared to the hundreds of observers and experts which EU member states and non-governmental organisations provide to monitor key elections, its impact is greater than the size of its delegation.

“The Union firmly believes that the consolidation of democracy is important. As the Parliament is the Union's democratically elected institution, it has a very important political and symbolic role to play, so the authorities and media in a country tend to turn to parliamentarians with their democratic legitimacy,” explained one EU official.

That role has been played in high-profile elections in South Africa (1994), Russia (1995 and 1996) and in Palestine (1996), and has tended to run alongside a wider involvement by the EU in buttressing democratic developments with funds to support programmes for the registration and education of voters.

In Bosnia alone, the Union allocated 8 million ecu.

MEPs are clear that their role is not to pass an overall judgement on the conduct of the elections. That is a responsibility they leave to the OSCE and to its Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR).

“The Parliament has very strict criteria and only refers to the areas its observers have visited. They do not give a general assessment, but feed their views into that process. This is what sets them apart from other monitors,” explained one official.

As the Parliament consolidates its experience in an area which was totally alien to members just a decade ago, it is being forced to reconsider its original electoral guidelines and to weigh its role in nurturing democracy against the demands on its budget.

Although parliamentary delegations are kept to a minimum - none has ever exceeded 15 MEPs - the costs are paid out of the institution's travel budget and pressure is fierce to keep expenditure as low as possible.

In addition, the Parliament has traditionally sent a delegation only to a country's first general or presidential election. But Pack believes the criteria should now be more flexible.

“We decided to observe this municipal poll because it was so important and I think we should be more flexible since the situation in a country can change so much. We should be able to observe two or three elections if we believe that is necessary,” she said.

That view is shared by German Socialist MEP Constanze Krehl, who led the team of observers during last year's Russian presidential election and believes that the activity is one of the most significant in the Parliament's mandate.

“We can observe the elections in the light of our experience of different systems in various European countries and it should be possible to go to subsequent elections so that we can monitor the development of democratic values,” she said.