Home > 1.1.3 Submission of candidatures > KYRGYZ REPUBLIC - Joint Opinion on the Draft Law on Presidential and Parliamentary Elections, The Draft Law on Elections to Local Governments and the Draft Law on the Formation of Election Commissions
 
 
 
Download file    
 
 
Paragraph 38
 

III. DISCUSSION OF THE DRAFT NATIONAL ELECTIONS LAW AND THE DRAFT ELECTION COMMISSIONS LAW


F. Collection of signatures for presidential candidacy


Article 52(8) states “either all or part of the submitted signatures selected randomly (through casting a lot) for checking are subject to checking”. This provision is not consistent with international good practice.[1] Extrapolation of the percentage of invalid signatures in a sample to the total number of signatures collected does not provide an accurate reconciliation of collected signatures. OSCE/ODIHR noted in its election observation mission report on the 2009 presidential elections:


“Like the Oblast Election Commissions (OECs), the Central Election Commission (CEC) extrapolated the percentage of invalid signatures to the total amount. This double extrapolation is unreasonable and led directly to the denial of registration for Mr. Aitikeev. Initially, the OECs found 8,435 of Mr. Aitikeev’s 74,081 submitted signatures invalid (11.4 per cent). The CEC further verified 5,109 of the remaining 65,646 signatures (8 per cent) and found 1,405 (27.5 per cent) invalid; they consequently invalidated an additional 18,025 signatures. This left Mr. Aitikeev with only 47,521 valid signatures, 2,479 short of the required 50,000 (figures provided by CEC)”.


The method of ‘random’ verification used by the CEC treats potential candidates differently and is not statistically valid. Firstly, the sample size of three per cent may be too small compared with the overall number of collected signatures, which varied greatly for several candidates. Secondly, the sample size and the choice of regions in which to undertake verification were not consistent for all nominees. This is important, especially considering that the more localised the sample (i.e. fewer regions), the higher the chances of invalid signatures being found and extrapolated.[2]


[1]  Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters, CDL-AD(2002)023rev, I.1.3 iv.


[2]  OSCE/ODIHR Final Report on the Kyrgyz Republic Presidential Election 23 July 2009 (Warsaw, 22 October 2009), at page 11.