Former U.S. Ambassador Heather M. Hodges Speeches

Free and Fair Elections: The World is Watching

Speech presented by Ambassador Heather M. Hodges
23 October 2004; 9:30am
Academy of Economic Studies
Alumni Congress

Deputy Prime Minister, ladies and gentlemen: it is a pleasure to be with you today. I remember fondly the first speech I gave as the American Ambassador to Moldova: it was in this very room, at the first conference of alumni from all of our exchange programs. I immediately sensed your enthusiasm and your dedication to making Moldova a more stable, prosperous democracy. In this past year I met many of you personally and learned about your activities. It has been very important for me to see that the “investment” we made in you has been returned many times over as you work to improve conditions in Moldova. I hope that you will take advantage of the time today to discuss what you have accomplished over the past year, and make plans for what you will accomplish over the next year.

Taking stock -- reviewing where you’ve been and planning where you would like to go -- is an important tool of management. This process is beneficial to individuals, companies, and even governments. Many people will look to the upcoming parliamentary elections as an opportunity to take stock, to evaluate how well Moldova is proceeding along the path of democratic reform and think about what direction they want the country to go.

Free and Fair Elections Affect More than just Domestic Politics

Over the past several months I have had the opportunity to underscore -- to the Government, to civil society representatives, and to the people of Moldova -- how important it is that the upcoming elections be conducted in a free, fair, and transparent manner. Now, some of you may be asking yourselves, why does the United States -- or the international community at large -- care if Moldovan elections are free and fair? Aren’t elections a domestic issue?

Yes, elections are primarily a matter of domestic concern. However, a country’s capacity to consistently hold elections that are seen as free and fair is a measure of democratization and the manner in which elections are conducted reverberate beyond the borders of a country. A free and fair election gives legitimacy to elected officials and increases their credibility in the eyes of both their countrymen and the international community.

Now, before I go any further I would like to be clear: the U.S. Embassy does not favor one candidate over another. It is not our place to have a preference in your elections. The future is for you and other Moldovans to decide. But we do care about the process. The international community will be asked to conclude whether the 2005 parliamentary elections were held in a free and fair manner. And this determination will have an impact upon the relationship Moldova has with other democracies.

What are Free and Fair Elections?

All of this emphasis on the process -- on elections that are free and fair -- begs the question: what are “free and fair” elections? A “free” electoral process is one where fundamental human rights and freedoms are respected. These include freedom of speech and expression, freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom from violence, freedom to question, challenge or register complaints or objections without negative repercussions, and freedom of access both to receive and transmit information and to observe the administrative process.

A “fair” election is one where the “playing field” is reasonably level and accessible to all parties candidates, and voters. A level playing field requires an independent, non-partisan electoral organization to administer the process and guaranteed rights and protection through the constitution and electoral legislation and regulations. You need clearly defined universal suffrage and secrecy of the vote. There must be equitable and balanced reporting by the media, equitable access to financial and material resources for campaigning, equitable opportunities for the electorate to receive political and voter information, and equitable treatment of candidates and parties by election officials, the government, the police, and the judiciary. A “fair” election must conclude with an open and transparent counting process. And, of course, a “fair” election process should not be disrupted by violence, intimidation, or coercion.

Now this makes it sound as if there is an unambiguous checklist that countries can refer to when planning an election. But it is not that simple. Over the past ten years, a set of “best practices” has spread as international organizations observe election processes worldwide. Both the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission and the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights -- or ODIHR as it is called -- are working to come up with a more concise standard. About a year ago ODIHR completed the first stage of this process, reviewing and compiling a comprehensive document that outlines the existing norms, political commitments, and principles that countries have agreed to. The Venice Commission has its own Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters, and earlier this year commented on the Convention on Election Standards, Electoral Rights and Freedoms drafted by the Association of Central and Eastern European Election Officials.

In many cases, however, it is still difficult to render an overall judgment about whether a particular election is free and fair. If an election meets all or nearly all of the criteria, it is clearly free and fair; if it violates nearly all of them, it is clearly not free and fair. But many elections, especially in countries that are in transition like Moldova, fall somewhere in between.

Moldova's Record

Moldova developed a record of well-administered elections that met international standards soon after independence. However, during the local elections held last year, international observers noted several negative trends detected during the campaign period. The ODIHR report on the 2003 local elections cites a number of positive elements that were observed, including generally successful management of the consequences of both the compression of the campaign timeframe and the territorial administrative reform, the competency and professionalism of election officials at all levels, the public confidence in the process on election day, and overall efficient and expeditious handling of complaints. However, the report also refers to problems of heavily biased state media, arrest of some opposition candidates and threats of arrests of others, and use of administrative resources for campaign purposes. These shortcomings must be addressed before the upcoming parliamentary elections.

I understand that the temptation to use the resources available when in a position of power is enormous. Politicians around the world have difficulties with this. In the United States the most notorious example is J. Edgar Hoover, who used the resources he controlled as Director of the FBI to investigate his political rivals trying to find information that would discredit them. Misuse of public funds is already illegal here in Moldova, but as I said a couple weeks ago when I was talking about the investment climate: it is not enough to have laws on the books. It is crucial that the Government of Moldova and all the stakeholders in the elections adhere to the laws. And while legal procedures against candidates should not be banned, there must be a commitment to forego using law enforcement and judiciary means as political tools. Ideally these institutions should be sufficiently independent and adequate checks and balances in place that those in power are unable to use them for political purposes.

Bias in state-owned or publicly funded media is another way in which those in power sometimes exploit their position. As I have said previously, any media organization funded by the taxpayers -- whether it is a public broadcaster or a state newspaper or news agency -- should provide an impartial, balanced, and objective overview of the full range of political, economic, social, and cultural developments in the Republic of Moldova. In addition, regulatory bodies should do what they can to ensure that commercial media organizations present objective information and clearly distinguish between fact and opinion.

Pluralism -- the belief that there are a great variety of individuals and perspectives in any society and that each person deserves to have his or her point of view heard and respected -- is vital for a well-functioning democracy. Vibrant pluralism is even more important during an election. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who was America’s President during World War II, said, “Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education.” Especially in a country like Moldova, where many people have access to information only through the national public broadcaster, bias, or lack thereof, in the coverage afforded by the public media will be one of the factors considered in evaluating whether the upcoming parliamentary elections are conducted in a free and fair manner.

The U.S. Embassy is pleased to support the monitoring project being conducted by the Independent Journalism Center. This monitoring will be expanded to include other media organizations, as we get closer to the election campaign. We appreciate the efforts of the IJC and we believe that their analysis has been impartial and objective. Earlier this week the IJC released their report covering Teleradio Moldova’s broadcasts during September. They found twenty-seven political and social actors who appeared in newscasts more than five times. Of these, twenty-four are state representatives. In terms of frequency, only 35 of over 1400 appearances by these political and social actors were by persons who do not represent the current government. Does this sound like balanced coverage? It certainly does not to me. It will be very difficult for the international community to conclude that elections have been fair if Teleradio Moldova continues presenting only one side of the story.

Free and Fair Elections are Everyone's Responsibility

The international community wants the upcoming elections to be conducted in a free and fair manner, and we are working with the government of Moldova and civil society towards that goal. But ensuring free and fair elections is a responsibility for all Moldovans. As we get closer to the elections, I would encourage each of you to get involved. If you support a particular political party, contact them and volunteer your time. If you want to do something non-partisan you can work as a domestic elections observer or even just talk to your friends and family about the importance of making an informed choice on election day.

Many alumni participated in a get-out-the-vote campaign during the 2003 local elections and I understand that there are several posters on display here at this conference highlighting those activities. The Alumni Resource Center will be implementing a similar get-out-the-vote campaign beginning in the next few weeks. I hope that you will start thinking about ways you might encourage people in your community to actively participate in the elections.

The upcoming elections will be an opportunity for all of us to take stock and evaluate Moldova’s transition to democracy. For the sake of the people of Moldova as well as for the future of relations between Moldova and the United States, I hope that it will be an election that we can all confirm was “free and fair.”

Thank you.

Ambassador Speeches

November 17, 2003
Ambassador Heather M. Hodges' Remarks at the Opening of Anti-Trafficking Conference

 

 Three years ago, a 17-year old Moldovan girl named Victoria had just graduated from school in Chisinau. Finding herself without money and without work, she jumped at a friend's offer to find her a job in Turkey. Victoria's friend drove her through Romania, but then turned west towards the Serbian border. At this point Victoria realized something was terribly wrong.

Her so-called "friend" took Victoria to the border, where she was seized by a group of Serbian men. They gave her a passport that said she was 18 and led her on foot into Serbia. There they raped her and told her that if she resisted, they would kill her. Victoria was now a piece of property that they owned - she had become part of an illicit trade that stripped her of any proof of identity and transported her to a place where she had no legal recourse, no agency to intervene on her behalf, and no one to turn to for help. Over the next two years, Victoria was bought and sold by different brothel owners ten times for an average price of $1,500. Eventually, Victoria became pregnant and, fearing a forced abortion, managed to escape into hiding.

Victoria was a debt slave. Her "debt" was the amount her owner had paid to buy her from her previous owner. Any payment for her services went straight to her owner. She was held in slavery until the money she supposedly owed had been paid to her owner, at which point she was sold again and began to work off her purchase cost again. Debt slavery fuels the terrible phenomenon known as trafficking- in-persons.

Despite the horrifying nature of her story, today we would call Victoria's experience average - even lucky. Of the thousands of girls that are trafficked every year, most never return and are never heard from again.

What is clear from this story is that traffickers prey on poor, vulnerable women. They operate internationally. They depend on poorly paid officials at borders and customs -- to look the other way, for a small fee.

What is also clear is that this is a violent crime, a crime that deprives its victims of their basic human rights. Those victims that survive -- and many do not -- are scarred for life.

We are all here today because we want to eliminate this modern form of slavery. We all want to catch the perpetrators, lock them up, and make the lives of vulnerable women and children safe and secure.

Moldova has made progress in the fight against trafficking in persons. According to the Ministry of Interior, in 2002 Moldovan police broke up 30 trafficking rings, and in the first eight months of 2003, it has already broken up another 20. These are encouraging developments.

This conference is evidence that the international community stands ready to help Moldova make further progress to increase the number of successful prosecutions and end this scourge.

Cross-border cooperation must improve. Source, transit, and destination countries must work together to find creative and effective solutions. And all of this should be done without putting the victims at further risk.

The problem of trafficking is a major priority of the U.S. government. The U.S. government is committed to working with Moldova and other countries represented here to fight it. President Bush demonstrated the importance of this issue in his remarks to the United Nations General Assembly in September. I will read a portion of his remarks:

"There's a special evil in the abuse and exploitation of the most innocent and vulnerable. The victims of the sex trade see little of life before they see the very worst of life -- an underground of brutality and lonely fear. Those who create these victims and profit from their sale must be severely punished. Those who patronize this industry debase themselves and deepen the misery of others. And governments that tolerate this trade are tolerating a form of slavery…

"We must now show new energy in fighting back an old evil. Nearly two centuries after the abolition of the transatlantic slave trade, and more than a century after slavery was ended in the last strongholds, the trade of human beings for any purpose must not be allowed to thrive in our time."

I know that President Voronin, like President Bush, has made this issue a priority for his government. With this kind of top-level commitment, we believe real progress is possible. I hope we are able to achieve concrete results -- in the coming months and in the longer term -- in prevention, law enforcement, and protection. The problem is ultimately rooted in poverty and corruption, and we must fight both. It will not be an easy road, but I believe the combined efforts of governments, international organizations, journalists, and NGOs dedicated to fighting trafficking will ultimately prove stronger than the trafficking networks.

At this point, I would like to turn the floor over to the next speaker, who is well-known to all the Moldovan participants at this conference and to those of us in the diplomatic community here in Moldova. Valerian Cristea was appointed Deputy Prime Minister in 2001. In the same year he became the chairman of the National Committee on Combating Trafficking in Persons, an interagency working group that guides the government's anti-trafficking efforts. Although I have only known the Deputy Prime Minister for about a month, I know he is committed to fighting trafficking in Moldova. It is my pleasure to turn the floor over to Deputy Prime Minister Cristea.