| Transnistria |
This article is part of the series: |
|
|
See also: Politics of Moldova |
|
Other countries · Atlas |
The 2006 referendum in Transnistria took place in Transnistria on 17 September 2006. On that date, Transnistria voted to continue its de facto independence and seek closer ties with Russia.
Contents |
Pro-Moldovan organisations announced before the referendum that they would not recognise its results. Ballots for the referendum were reprinted 3 times, as the chairman of electoral commission, Piotr Denisenko, announced a shrinkage of electorate of 7% compared with previous year[1]
The referendum asked voters:
Of the total of 394,861 registered voters, the voter turnout was 78.6%,[2] substantially more than the 50%+1 required by law to validate the referendum.[3] On the day of the referendum, no exit polling was allowed within 25 meters of polling stations, to prevent disruption of voting.[4]
International organisations, such as the OSCE,[5] European Union,[6] GUAM, and some other countries (Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, Turkey, Croatia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Serbia, Albania, Bosnia, Iceland, Norway) did not recognise the referendum.[7][8]
According to Russian News Agency RIA Novosti, more than 130 international observers monitored the referendum and reported that "they did not register any procedural violations during the secret balloting,"[9] and the representative of the Congress of Russian Communities from Moldova declared that the referendum was held according to international standards.[10] However, no internationally recognised monitoring organisations had observers present.
Viktor Alksnis, a deputy from the Russian party "Rodina" stated that referendum in Transnistria was held without any violations of legislation and democratic standards.[11] Viktor Alksnis is known to have previously described the Transnistrian Republic as the base from which the Soviet Union's restoration would begin.[12]
In the opinion of the Ukrainian foreign ministry, the situation in Transnistria fails to meet the conditions of a free will expression by citizens.[13]
According to the OSCE, the media climate in the Transdniestrian region is restrictive, as authorities there continue a long-standing campaign to silence independent opposition voices and movements.[14] Althoguh the OSCE decided not to send any observers to monitor the referendum,[15] 130 observers from CIS and Europe and from eleven election monitoring organizations who did attend the referendum had different reactions.[16]
In contrast, the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Moldova (HCHRM) claims to have observed a series of infringements at the referendum[17]:
Karel De Gucht (Chairman of the OSCE) expressed an opinion about the "lack of basic requirements for free and fair elections, such as freedom of the media, freedom of assembly and political pluralism, in the region pre-determined the results" and argued that the questions in the referendum are suggestively worded.[19] In a possible manipulation of the public opinion, people are asked to choose between freedom ("free association") and loss of independence ("renounce the Transnistria's independent status"), between reality ("support the course") and possibility ("consider it possible") This formulation could have resulted in a response bias.[20]
Victor Josu, deputy editor-in-chief of Russian-language Moldovan newspaper Moldavskiye Vedomosti, an accredited observer, described the referendum as a successful public relations action (regardless of violations and a lack of recognition) and reported favorably on a comparison between "recognized Chişinau" and "unrecognized Tiraspol" in an article which emphasized the openness, transparency and glasnost of the referendum process.[21]
Sergei Bagapsh, president of Abkhazia (Abkhazia claims independence from Georgia, but has a disputed status), has said his republic "supports the aspirations of Transdniestria toward independence and its choice of unification with Russia." [22]
|
||||||||||||||