Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

Will growing pains mar the Myanmar election?

Reading Time: 5 mins
Staff members seal ballot boxes as they prepare for advance voting at a polling station of South Oakkalarpa township, Yangon, Myanmar, 30 October 2015. (Photo: AAP)

In Brief

The November 2015 election is the largest election held in the history of Myanmar in every way. It is the largest in terms of the number of candidates (6189), the number of political parties (93), the number of registered voters (23 million), the number of female candidates (13 per cent) and the number of independent candidates (323).

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

And for the first time Myanmar has accepted external assistance and international election monitoring. But the election’s credibility is being threatened by erroneous electoral rolls, campaign irregularities, public and private media bias, and inefficiencies resulting from logistical challenges.

As the November election draws closer, political campaigning has reached its climax. The ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), with obvious backing from the military, is portraying itself as a reformist party and a protector of amyo barthar tharthanar (race and religion). The opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) led by Aung San Suu Kyi is running with the slogan that ‘it’s time to change’.

Ethnic-minority parties are also campaigning hard, each presenting themselves as the most suitable representatives of their own ethnic state. There are seven, each largely dominated by a single ethnic minority. Other mainstream minor parties claim that they are giving alternative options to voters, representing a ‘third force’ in Myanmar politics. Meanwhile, Buddhist nationalists and activists are busy asserting their influence in the election in every way possible. The main contests are expected to be between the NLD as a national brand and incumbent USDP candidates’ local campaign in the Burman-dominated regions, and also between mainstream and ethnic parties in the ethnic states. The stakes are high.

The good news is that there have been signs of political will for a credible election. Resources have been poured in and genuine preparations have been made for a trustworthy election. Instead of refusing external input, the Union Election Commission (UEC) has held regular consultations with political parties and civil society organisations.

Some bold ideas were introduced. Electoral rolls were digitised for the first time. Pilot projects were conducted in several constituencies. Indelible ink is to be used to prevent double voting. Election police comprised of local volunteers have been commissioned to enhance security of the polling stations. In order to boost efficiency and motivation, election volunteers will receive a US$3 payment for the first time. And 13 domestic organisations are sending 10,000 election observers.

Myanmar has also accepted various forms of international assistance for the November election for the first time. A five year (2014–2018) strategic plan for the UEC was formulated with the help of the USAID and International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES). More than 500 observers are being sent from 21 countries to monitor the election. Five prominent international organisations, the EU, the Carter Centre, the International Republican Institute, the Asian Network for Free Elections and the Netherlands-based Gender Concerns International are also observing the election on a long-term basis. Everything looks set for a smooth and clean election.

But the credibility of the election has been challenged by inaccuracies in the deeply-flawed electoral rolls. The UEC has been blamed for incompetence and was even accused of sabotaging its own election. The overseas voting process has also been mired with missing names and ballot papers.

Some bureaucrats have posted their frustrations on social media, revealing their side of the story. They largely point out that the errors in digitising the electoral rolls were the result of the advice of the international observer organisations. For instance, they were told to input data based on two sets of population lists compiled separately by the immigration and local authorities, resulting in duplication. And there were unrealistic expectations for data entry — a target of a thousand entries a day for one operator. Only two computers were used for several hundred thousand people. After days of tedious work, human error affected the quality of the data. Some officials even took matters into their own hands by switching to alternative methods.

More problems arose during the election campaign due partially to a lack of experience of competitive elections. Local and social media have been constantly monitoring political campaigns, pointing out irregularities. But as the media, and especially social media, lacks impartiality, the election campaigns have become messy.

The credibility of the election is a litmus test for Myanmar’s nascent transition towards democracy. Expectations are high, as are the stakes. Foreign direct investment and international assistance are further linked to the election. The domestic economy is waiting for a signal from the election.

The pace of the peace process will further be determined by the electoral legitimacy of the new government. It is not the outcome of the election, but how free and fair the November election is, which matters most. Failure to conduct a transparent election would catapult Myanmar backwards, potentially bringing political turmoil, military repression and economically-damaging armed conflicts.

It is undeniable that the 2015 election is more competitive and transparent than previous elections held in Myanmar’s history. But it has been marred by messiness and contention. These are necessary growing pains that both politicians and the public must confront in order to take Myanmar to the next stage of its democratic transition. If they can embrace this together, rather than throwing blame at one another, Myanmar has bright days ahead.

Chit Win is a PhD candidate at the Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs at The Australian National University.

2 responses to “Will growing pains mar the Myanmar election?”

  1. Mr Chit Win you are indeed sanguine about the possibility of a good outcome to the election. You seem to focus on trifles such as ‘irregularities’ in the election process and other unimportant items rather than the bigger picture. The fact is that the elections will only exist as such because the powers that be have allowed it. What makes you so sure that they shan’t annul the election should the results prove to be contrary to their aims? After all, they called the elections and created a phony parliament. Under these circumstances, is it wise to focus on the so called ‘elections’ itself and how this upcoming election is some how better than he last?

    • Mr. Vertannes,
      What Myanmar needs is to develop a trust between the people, military, ethnic nationalities, opposition, monks and etc. These “trifles” showed the lack of trust and elections are a healthy exercise in making everyone’s positions understod to each other. Regardless of the uneven playing field (and there of course reasons for why the playing field is unlevel), the election brings some political breathing space for everyone. It is an experience that everyone in Myanmar has to endure.

Support Quality Analysis

Donate
The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (https://www.eastasiaforum.org)

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.