The
Georgian
elections held on October 30, 2020, resulted in a
contested victory
for the ruling Georgian Dream party and its leader, Bidzina Ivanishvili. According to the
Central Election Commission
(CEC), which is controlled by the ruling party, the Georgian Dream coalition secured a clear majority in Parliament with approximately 48% of the votes. However, the
pro-European opposition
parties and their allies, as well as several
civil society organizations
, claimed victory and accused the CEC of numerous electoral violations.
The opposition parties, including the United National Movement (UNM) and the Strategic Initiatives Group, alleged that there were widespread incidents of ballot stuffing, voter intimidation, and pressure on election administrators. They pointed to a number of specific instances where they claimed that the CEC had manipulated data or ignored complaints. For example, they claimed that there were thousands of votes cast in precincts where there were fewer than 10 registered voters. They also alleged that the CEC had failed to investigate credible complaints of electoral fraud, and that the police had failed to intervene when opposition supporters were attacked by pro-government thugs.
The Georgian Dream party and its supporters rejected these allegations, arguing that the elections had been free and fair. They pointed to the fact that international observers, including a delegation from the European Union (EU), had observed the elections and reported few irregularities. However, the EU observer mission did express concerns about some aspects of the voting process, including delays in opening some polling stations and issues with the voter list.
The controversy over the elections has deepened Georgia’s political crisis, which began when the opposition accused the ruling party of rigging an earlier parliamentary election in 201The ongoing crisis has led to widespread protests and unrest, as well as pressure on Georgia from the EU and other international actors to respect democratic norms and uphold the rule of law. As the situation in Georgia remains volatile, it is clear that the outcome of these elections will have significant implications for the country’s future political direction and its relationship with the West.
I. Introduction
Brief overview of the Georgia elections, held on October 30, 2020
The Georgian elections of October 30, 2020, marked a significant milestone in the country’s political landscape. With Europe watching closely, Georgia held crucial parliamentary elections, which were seen as a litmus test for its commitment to democratic values and European integration. The stakes were high, as the outcome would not only shape Georgian domestic politics but also influence the country’s relations with Europe and other global powers.
Importance of the elections for Georgian politics and relations with Europe
The importance of these elections stemmed from the fact that they came at a critical juncture for Georgian politics. After years of democratic progress, including reforms in areas such as media freedom and electoral legislation, there were concerns that the country might be drifting away from its European path. A strong showing by pro-European forces in the elections could serve as a boost to Georgian democracy and strengthen its ties with the European Union (EU). Conversely, a poor performance by pro-European parties might raise doubts about the sustainability of Georgia’s democratic gains and dampen European enthusiasm for closer cooperation.
Initial results: Georgian Dream party in the lead according to official data
According to initial official data, the Georgian Dream party (GD), which has been in power since 2013, was leading with a comfortable margin. However, the preliminary results did little to quell the controversy surrounding the elections and the allegations of electoral violations that began surfacing even before polling day.
Controversy surrounding the elections: Pro-EU opposition and civil society organizations claim victory and report electoral violations
As the votes were being counted, there were reports of electoral violations from various quarters. The pro-European opposition parties and civil society organizations, in particular, accused the GD of manipulating the process to secure an unfair advantage. They pointed to numerous instances of ballot stuffing, intimidation of voters and irregularities in the counting process. These claims, if proven true, could significantly undermine the legitimacy of the elections and potentially jeopardize Georgia’s European aspirations.
Background
The political context of Georgia’s elections is shaped by the power dynamic between the Georgian Dream (GD) party, which has been in office since 2013, and the pro-European opposition, comprised of the United National Movement (UNM) and European Georgia (EG). The GD, led by former prime minister Bidzina Ivanishvili, came to power in 2013, following a landslide victory. The GD’s platform focused on economic development and improved relations with Russia. However, their tenure has been marked by allegations of human rights abuses, including the use of force against peaceful protesters, and concerns over media freedom and judicial independence.
Georgian Dream party (GD) in power since 2013
The GD’s rise to power was met with mixed reactions from the international community, with some expressing concerns over the potential for democratic backsliding. Nevertheless, the GD maintained a steady grip on power, winning a majority in the 2016 parliamentary elections and re-electing Ivanishvili as prime minister in 2017.
Pro-European opposition, including the United National Movement (UNM) and European Georgia (EG)
Meanwhile, the pro-European opposition has been advocating for closer ties with the EU and the West. The UNM, led by former president Mikheil Saakashvili, came to power in 2004, and during their tenure implemented significant reforms aimed at bringing Georgia closer to the EU. However, these reforms were met with resistance from Russia, which viewed them as a threat to its influence in the region.
Pre-election environment
As the 2020 Georgian elections approached, tensions between the GD and the opposition intensified. Allegations of bias and electoral manipulation began to surface, with the opposition accusing the GD of attempting to rig the election in their favor. These concerns were further fueled by the withdrawal of several prominent opposition candidates from the race, citing pressure from the authorities or fear for their safety.
Tensions
The pre-election environment was marked by a series of high-profile protests, with the opposition calling for free and fair elections. Clashes between protesters and police resulted in injuries and arrests, adding to the already volatile atmosphere.
Allegations of bias
The opposition also accused the GD of using state resources to gain an unfair advantage in the elections, pointing to instances of media coverage favoring the GD and allegations of voter registration fraud.
Calls for free and fair elections
In response to these concerns, international observers were invited to monitor the elections, with the European Union (EU) and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) both deploying monitoring missions. The opposition called on these observers to ensure that the elections were free and fair, and to hold those responsible for any electoral manipulation accountable.
I Georgia’s Election Day: October 30, 2020
Voting process:
On October 30, 2020, Georgia held its parliamentary elections. The day was marked by long lines and delayed opening of polling stations in some areas, causing concerns among voters and observers.
Long lines, delayed opening of polling stations, and other challenges
According to reports, polling stations in Tbilisi and other urban areas opened late due to technical issues with the electronic voter registration system. This resulted in lengthy queues, with some voters waiting for hours to cast their ballots. In addition, there were instances of allegations of voter intimidation and irregularities at some polling stations.
Initial reactions from Georgian parties and civil society organizations:
As the votes were being counted, the Georgian Dream (GD) party claimed a commanding lead according to official data. However, the pro-European opposition parties and their supporters contested the results.
Statements from key figures within the Georgian Dream party and the pro-European opposition
Bidzina Ivanishvili, the founder and chairman of GD, expressed confidence that his party would win a clear majority in parliament. Meanwhile, opposition leaders such as Grigol Vashadze from the United National Movement and Nika Melia from the European Georgia party claimed that they had evidence of widespread irregularities and fraud.
Early reactions from civil society organizations, including Transparency International Georgia and the Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association
Civil society organizations closely monitored the elections and expressed concerns about the reports of long queues, delays in opening polling stations, and allegations of irregularities. Transparency International Georgia called for transparency and accountability in the vote counting process. The Georgian Young Lawyers’ Association, which had deployed over 500 observers to polling stations across the country, issued a statement expressing its “deep concern” about the incidents reported and urged the Central Election Commission to take swift action to address them.
Post-election developments:
Allegations of electoral violations
Following the Georgian Parliamentary Elections in October 2020, multiple civil society organizations and opposition parties reported numerous instances of electoral fraud, intimidation, and bias. These allegations were a cause for concern, casting doubt on the credibility and fairness of the election process.
Specific incidents of electoral fraud, intimidation, and bias
Some examples of reported violations included:
- Ballot stuffing: Reports of ballots being falsified, or multiple ballots being filled out and submitted for a single voter.
- Pressure on voters: Instances of coercion or intimidation, preventing individuals from casting their votes as they saw fit.
- Manipulation of vote counts: Allegations of tampering with the actual tally of votes.
These actions, if proven true, could significantly undermine the integrity of the election results.
Reactions from the Georgian authorities
The Georgian authorities, including the Central Election Commission (CEC) and other official bodies, vehemently denied any wrongdoing. They urged calm and patience among the population, insisting that the elections had been conducted fairly and in accordance with Georgian law.
International observations
International observers, including the European Union (EU) and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), issued preliminary assessments of the elections’ conduct. They called for further investigation into reported violations, highlighting the importance of addressing these concerns to maintain trust in Georgian democracy.
Implications and analysis
Significance of the alleged electoral violations:
The alleged electoral violations in Georgia’s October 2020 parliamentary elections have far-reaching implications for Georgian democracy, EU relations, and internal political dynamics.
Impact on Georgian democracy:
The electoral process has been a significant test for Georgian democracy, with the OSCE observing various irregularities. These violations have raised concerns about the credibility of Georgia’s democratic institutions and their commitment to upholding international standards. If not addressed, these issues could further undermine public trust in the electoral process and potentially escalate social unrest.
Impact on EU relations:
Georgia’s EU aspirations are also at stake, with the European Union closely monitoring the situation. The alleged electoral violations have strained relations between Tbilisi and Brussels, potentially delaying the European Union’s decision on granting Georgia a visa-liberalization agreement. This could have economic and political consequences for Georgian citizens, as well as impact the EU’s credibility in its role as a promoter of democratic values.
Impact on internal political dynamics:
The alleged electoral violations have also influenced the domestic political landscape, with Georgian political parties and their alliances reacting differently. Some parties have called for dialogue to address the issues, while others have resorted to protests and confrontations. These dynamics could further polarize Georgian society and potentially lead to increased instability.
Lessons learned and potential for reform:
The alleged electoral violations in Georgia provide valuable lessons for addressing future elections and strengthening democratic institutions. Possible steps towards reform could include:
Improving electoral legislation:
Revising the electoral code to ensure greater transparency, accountability, and impartiality in the electoral process.
Strengthening democratic institutions:
Improving the functioning of the Georgian Central Election Commission and increasing its independence from political interference.
Addressing disinformation:
Combatting disinformation campaigns during elections through measures such as media literacy programs and fact-checking initiatives.
Engaging civil society:
Encouraging greater participation from civil society organizations in the electoral process to promote transparency and accountability.
VI. Conclusion
Summary of the main points of the article: The recently held Georgian elections have resulted in a contested victory, with the Georgian Dream (GD) party leading according to official data but the opposition reporting electoral violations and claiming victory. This controversial outcome raises significant questions for Georgian democracy and EU relations.
Contested victory
: The elections, held on October 30, 2020, have been marked by numerous allegations of electoral fraud and irregularities. While the Georgian Dream party has emerged as the winner according to official results, the opposition, led by the United National Movement (UNM), has disputed the outcome and called for new elections.
Implications for Georgian democracy
: The ongoing controversy threatens to undermine the credibility of Georgian democracy and its commitment to free and fair elections. It also risks fueling political instability, potentially leading to unrest and social unrest.
Challenges for EU relations
: The controversy also poses challenges for Georgia’s relationship with the European Union, which has been a strong supporter of Georgian democracy and reform efforts. The EU has expressed concern over the election outcome and called for a thorough investigation into allegations of electoral violations.
Opportunities for reform
: Despite the challenges, there are also opportunities for reform and strengthening democratic institutions in Georgia. The EU and other international partners can continue to support Georgian efforts to address electoral irregularities and promote transparency and accountability.
| Keywords: | |
|---|---|
| Georgian elections, contested victory, GD, opposition, electoral violations, Georgian democracy, EU relations, reform |
