The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

By Ali M. Latifi, Los Angeles Times

The campaign team of Abdullah Abdullah — the former foreign minister running against Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai for the presidency of Afghanistan — has issued a 24-hour notice to the United Nations and international observers that if changes are not made to the processes of the ongoing audit of all eight million votes cast in the second round of the election, they will back out of the election process entirely.

“We will give one day to the international community to review and assure that the vote auditing and the political negotiations are moving forward properly… If our demands are not met and the auditing not conducted legitimately and the political talks without honesty, then we will withdraw from both processes,” said Abdullah spokesman Syed Fazel Sancharaki.

The Monday afternoon warning came a week after the team of Reform and Partnership, as Abdullah’s campaign refers to themselves, backed out of the audit claiming their concerns about widespread fraud in the June 14 runoff were ignored by the United Nations.

“From the beginning we were willing to join the audit because we thought it would lead to the separation of clean and fraudulent votes. That’s what we were working towards,” Muslim Saadat, a spokesman for the Abdullah campaign, told The Times last week, after the Reform and Partnership team backed out of the audit.

If followed through, Monday’s warning would mark the fourth and presumably final time the Reform and Partnership team has backed out of the election process since the second round in June.

What sets Monday’s threat apart from prior boycotts is that for the first time since Abdullah and Ghani first pledged to form a government of national unity per the audit result, the Reform and Partnership team has threatened to walk away from the political process that was intended to be carried out in parallel with the technical process.

Sancharaki said his team would “form a national unity government only when all the results are finalized” and fraudulent votes are separated from clean ones.

That political process included negotiations on dividing responsibilities and posts of the potential unity government.

The threat of backing out from the political negotiations is seen as a formidable shift among the Abdullah camp.

Speaking to The Times last week, Saadat said, with the exception of a couple of points, which had been referred to the candidates themselves, the political process had been “mostly on track.” The technical side, however, including criteria for the invalidation of votes, “saw consistent blocks along the way,” Saadat said.

Referring to a “triangle of fraud” comprised of the presidential palace, the Independent Election Commission and the Ghani campaign, representatives of the Abdullah team presented evidence of what they said were 1.5 million result sheets panning several districts.

Most notably, the Reform and Partnership team showed examples of what they said were result sheets from 2,200 polling stations which showed nearly 100 percent of votes for Ghani, featured similar handwriting, and were signed by a single person.

On sheets where there were signatures by Abdullah campaign observers, a representative from the Reform and Partnership team said votes for Dr Abdullah were entirely absent.

“That means the Abdullah team observer could sign, but not vote,” the representative said.

Sources speaking to The Times said Monday’s threat of withdrawal from the political process may be a sign of disunity among the Reform and Partnership team.

The most divisive figures, said sources speaking on condition of anonymity, remain Mohammad Mohaqiq — the Hazara warlord running as Abdullah’s second vice president — and Atta Muhammad Nur — the governor of northern Balkh province.

Nur, who had previously warned of nation-wide unrest if Abdullah lost the presidency in a fraudulent ballot, issued a similar warning on his Facebook page shortly after the press conference:
“It is to be noted that the national and international institutions would be accountable for any consequences, despite our previous warnings which have been ignored by them. Those, who ridiculed the election process with industrial-scale fraud and are attempting to grab power by legitimizing their frauds, would be accountable.”

Monday’s threat came 24 hours before the date Hamid Karzai, the incumbent, had hoped the new president would be inaugurated after the initial August 2 date was pushed back to accommodate the audit.

In a statement to the media, Aimal Faizi, presidential palace spokesman, tried to ease fears that Karzai would vacate his post prior to a resolution of the election deadlock.

“The President is not considering the step down before the official transfer of power to the new Afghan President. It is unconstitutional to step down before officially transferring the power to his successor.”

International and domestic election watchers had hoped the matter would be resolved before a September 4 NATO conference was scheduled to begin in Wales. If no president is elected by that time, Bismillah Khan Mohammadi, defense minister, would attend as the Afghan representative.

AFP Photo/Shah Marai

Interested in world news? Sign up for our daily email newsletter!

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Eric Holder

The failure of major federal voting rights legislation in the Senate has left civil rights advocates saying they are determined to keep fighting—including by suing in battleground states. But the little bipartisan consensus that exists on election reform would, at best, lead to much narrower legislation that is unlikely to address state-level GOP efforts now targeting Democratic blocs.

“This is the loss of a battle, but it is not necessarily the loss of a war, and this war will go on,” Eric Holder, the former U.S. attorney general and Democrat, told MSNBC, saying that he and the Democratic Party will be suing in states where state constitutions protect voting rights. “This fight for voting rights and voter protection and for our democracy will continue.”

“The stakes are too important to give up now,” said Damon Hewitt, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which for years has operated an Election Day hotline to help people vote. “Our country cannot claim to be free while allowing states to legislate away that freedom at will.”

In recent weeks, as it became clear that the Senate was not going to change its rules to allow the Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to pass with a simple majority, there have been efforts by some lawmakers, election policy experts, and civil rights advocates to identify what election reforms could pass the Senate.

“There are several areas… where I think there could be bipartisan consensus,” said David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, in a briefing on January 20. “These areas are all around those guardrails of democracy. They are all about ensuring that however the voters speak that their voice is heard… and cannot be subverted by anyone in the post-election process.”

Becker cited updating the 1887 Electoral Count Act, which addressed the process where state-based slates of presidential electors are accepted by Congress. (In recent weeks, new evidence has surfaced showing that Donald Trump’s supporters tried to present Congress with forged certificates as part of an effort to disrupt ratifying the results on January 6, 2021.) Updating that law could also include clarifying which state officials have final authority in elections and setting out clear timetables for challenging election results in federal court after Election Day.

Five centrist Washington-based think tanks issued a report on January 20, Prioritizing Achievable Federal Election Reform, which suggested federal legislation could codify practices now used by nearly three-quarters of the states. Those include requiring voters to present ID, offering at least a week of early voting, allowing all voters to request a mailed-out ballot, and allowing states to start processing returned absentee ballots a week before Election Day.

But the report, which heavily drew on a task force of 29 state and local election officials from 20 states convened by Washington’s Bipartisan Policy Center, was notable in what it did not include, such as restoring the major enforcement section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was removed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013. It did not mention the Electoral Count Act nor growing threats to election officials from Trump supporters.

“This won’t satisfy all supporters of the Freedom to Vote Act, but this is a plausible & serious package of reforms to make elections more accessible and secure that could attract bipartisan support,” tweeted Charles Stewart III, a political scientist and director of the MIT Election Data and Science Lab. “A good starting point.”

The reason the centrist recommendations won’t satisfy civil rights advocates is that many of the most troubling developments since the 2020 election would likely remain.

Targeting Battleground States

Keep reading... Show less

Former president Donald Trump

By Rami Ayyub and Alexandra Ulmer

(Reuters) -The prosecutor for Georgia's biggest county on Thursday requested a special grand jury with subpoena power to aid her investigation into then-President Donald Trump's efforts to influence the U.S. state's 2020 election results.

Keep reading... Show less
x
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}