Newsroom
Decision issued on election complaints in Bosnia and Herzegovina
SARAJEVO 24 November 2000
SARAJEVO, 24 November 2000 - At its session on 23 November 2000, the Bosnia and Herzegovina Election Appeals Sub-Commission (EASC) ruled on several cases regarding the 11 November 2000 general elections.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-68 (Supplemental Decision): SDA Campaign Financing Requirements
At its session on 23 November, 2000, the EASC issued a supplemental decision on a referral from the PEC alleging that the account of the Organizacija Porodica Sehida I Poginulih Boraca (the "Organization") was in fact an undisclosed SDA account which received contributions which violated the Law on Party Financing and the PEC Rules and Regulations. In the supplemental decision, the EASC found that the Organization's account was under the direction and control of the SDA. The EASC did not, however, find evidence that contributions from public companies to the Organization were transferred to the SDA in violation of Article 1606 of the PEC Rules and Regulations, which prohibits contributions from public companies to political parties for campaign purposes.
Notwithstanding this decision, the EASC noted that there was considerable risk that the SDA would use contributions received by the Organization in the future for a political use. To lessen this risk and give substance to the SDA's claim that the Organization is an entirely separate entity, the EASC ordered that the SDA immediately divest itself of any direction and control of the Organization. The EASC directed the SDA to complete this divestment by November 30, 2000, and report the measures taken to the EASC by December 1, 2000.
The EASC also found that the SDA failed to properly disclose and itemize a contribution of 75,000 KM from the Organization as required by Article 1601 of PEC Rules and Regulations. The SDA's failure to properly disclose and itemize this contribution, despite specific requests from the PEC, constituted obstruction of the audit team. As a sanction, the first candidate from the SDA's candidates list for Federation Parliament House of Representatives, Constituency 407, was stricken.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-112 et. seq.: Travnik Municipality Polling Stations - Summary Decision
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a summary decision involving numerous cases of alleged fraud concentrated in six polling stations in the Travnik Municipality. The EASC conducted a thorough investigation of all complaints received and confiscated the polling station poll books and Central Voters Register as evidence in four polling stations in Nova Bila, one in Puticevo, and one in Delilovac.
The EASC investigation confirmed the numerous instances of violations presented through citizens' complaints, International Observers' reports, political party observers' complaints, and representatives of international organizations. The evidence clearly established a pattern of voter fraud in the six polling stations in question. The investigation confirmed that many of the irregularities were fashioned by the HDZ and designed to benefit the HDZ.
As sanction, the EASC censured the HDZ for organizing this pattern of fraudulent activity and struck the first candidate on the HDZ candidates list for the Cantonal Assembly, Canton 6. The EASC found that the polling station committees were directly responsible for participating in the instances of fraud. The EASC ordered that the salary of all members of these polling stations be withheld and forfeited, and further directed that none of these individuals be employed in any position connected to the election process in the future.EASC Case No. 00-GE-123 et. seq. : Polling Station Complaints-Summary Decision
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a Summary Decision containing 44 separate complaints alleging violations at various polling stations, or by polling station members, on election day. It has been the practice for the EASC to issue summary decisions for cases in which the EASC has no jurisdiction or which involve relatively minor violations.
Of these cases, 39 were dismissed based on insufficient evidence or failing to state a violation of the PEC Rules and Regulations. In five cases, the violation was found to be de minimus with no impact on the outcome of the elections. In each of these five cases, the polling station committee or the Municipal Election Committee took the appropriate steps in response to the violation. In one case, the EASC censured the Party of Democratic Action (SDA) for allowing its officials to represent themselves as OSCE officials and direct voters to vote for the SDA.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-148, et. seq.: Silence Period Violations - Summary Decision
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a summary decision containing ten separate cases which alleged violations of the "campaign silence period" established in the PEC Rules and Regulations. Several of these complaints contained multiple allegations. This is the second summary decision issued by the EASC on silence period violations. The EASC notes that the provisions regulating the "campaign silence period" changed between the municipal election and the general election, and many of the silence period complaints did not allege a violation of the new silence period provisions. It has been the practice of the EASC to issue summary decisions for cases in which the EASC has no jurisdiction or which involve relatively minor violations.
The EASC found that five of the allegations did not allege a violation of the campaign silence period and were dismissed on that basis. One allegation was dismissed on the basis of a lack of evidence. The EASC found violations of the Rules and Regulations in eight of the allegations. In six of these allegations the political party involved was censured. In two of the allegations, the nature of the violations were severe enough that the EASC struck a candidate in each instance.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-189: Exchange of Government Funds for Party Support
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision in response to a complaint filed by the New Croat Initiative (NHI). The complaint alleged that the Mayor of Usora, who is also president of the local Croat Democratic Union (HDZ), distributed 139,000 KM of "municipal funds" shortly before the general elections for the purpose of gaining votes for the HDZ.
The NHI claimed that the funds came from the Federation BiH government and were originally intended for other purposes. The EASC found that, although the timing of the distribution of these funds may have been beneficial to the HDZ, more evidence was required to make a finding that money was received in exchange for voter support. Moreover, it is not within the EASC's authority to determine whether the Mayor's distribution of the funds was in violation of local law and recommended that the case be referred to the appropriate officials for investigation. The EASC dismissed this complaint for insufficient evidence.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-227: Exchange of Government Funds for Party Support
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision in response to a complaint filed by the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in Orasje. The complaint alleged that the Cantonal Assembly of Canton 4, which is dominated by the HDZ, gave 50 KM to children of families whose parents are unemployed on the day before the election. The SDP alleged that this distribution of cantonal funds was designed to influence voters to vote for the HDZ and requested that the EASC "annul" elections in the municipalities of Orasje as well as in Odzak. The EASC found no direct evidence to support the SDP's claim. The timing of the distribution may have been beneficial for the HDZ, but more evidence was required to make a finding that the children of these unemployed adults received money in exchange for the adults' support at the polls. The EASC dismissed this complaint for insufficient evidence.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-190 (HDZ): Assault of NHI President
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision regarding a complaint from the New Croat Initiative Party (NHI) against the Croat Democratic Union (HDZ). The complaint alleged that Ivica Artmagic, the Vice President of the HDZ in Sivsa, threatened and assaulted Kresimir Zubak, the President of the NHI, after a NHI pre-election rally in the Municipality of Usora on 4 November 2000. The complaint also alleged that Mr. Artmagic threatened and assaulted Zvonko Jurisic, a NHI municipal councilor in Usora.
The EASC's investigation confirmed that Mr. Artmagic hit Mr. Zubak in the chest with his elbow while Zubak was leaving the hall where the rally was held. Mr. Artmagic also threatened to slap Mr. Zubak and threw a cigarette lighter at Mr. Jurisic. Mr. Artmagic then drew a gun from his belt, pointed it towards the ground and shouted "I'll shoot". The MUP reported that Mr. Artmagic was wearing a HDZ badge on this chest.
The EASC found that Mr. Artmagic violated Article 704 of the PEC Rules and Regulations by carrying and displaying a weapon at a NHI political meeting, and disturbing the gathering of another political party by threatening and assaulting Mr. Zubak and Mr. Jurisic. The EASC also found that the HDZ was responsible for the conduct of Mr. Artmagic, a representative and supporter of the party.
The EASC directed the HDZ and the HDZ Municipal Board in Usora to remove Mr. Artmagic from the Usora Municipal Board and from any other position he holds with the HDZ. Mr. Artmagic was also prohibited from further participation in the political process as a party officer, official or a candidate. Given the HDZ's attempt to mislead the OSCE regarding Mr. Artmagic's relationship with the party, the first candidate from the HDZ's candidates list for Cantonal Assembly, Canton, 4, Constituency 204 was stricken.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-233: Alleged Counting Irregularities
HSP At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision in response to a complaint from the Croat Party of Rights (HSP). The complaint alleged there was an "unbelievable difference" between the number of ballots cast in polling stations and the number of absentee ballots being counted in the Counting Center in Sarajevo. The EASC considered this complaint to be similar to the HDZ's complaint in EASC Case No. 00-GE-231 (November 18, 2000), in which the HDZ claimed a disproportionately high" number of absentee ballots were being counted for Canton 7 and a "disproportionately low" number for Canton 6. The EASC found insufficient evidence to support the allegations of fraud in the counting of absentee ballots for Cantons 6 and 7 and invited the complainant to review the EASC's decision in Case No. 00-GE-231. The complaint was dismissed.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-234: Alleged Counting Irregularities -SDA
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision in response to a complaint filed by the Party of Democratic Action (SDA). The complaint alleged: (1) that the Counting Center was not disclosing information about absentee ballots, (2) that the Counting Center is not performing validation tests of scanners as required by the PEC Rules and Regulations, and (3) that scanners are not reliable because of discrepancies found after a manual count of a batch of ballots from Out of Country (OCV). The SDA requested that all OCV batches be manually counted.
Following an investigation, the EASC found that the counting process employed by the Counting Center was transparent. The information the SDA was requesting was simply unknown and the question was most likely based on their observer's misunderstanding of the counting process. With respect to the second claim, the EASC found that the Counting Center was in full compliance with the PEC Rules and Regulations in testing scanners. Finally, although discrepancies did exist in the batch the SDA manually recounted, the discrepancies were found later to be not as significant as the SDA suggested. The Counting Center implemented additional precautions and repeated the manual count process for all batches in question to ensure accuracy. The EASC found insufficient evidence to order a manual recount and dismissed this complaint.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-238: HDZ Counting Appeal II and Appeal for Previous EASC Decisions
At it session on 23 November 2000, the EASC issued a decision in response to a complaint filed by the HDZ which contained two components: (1) the HDZ requested an explanation as to why the votes allocated to them in the BIH House of Representatives was reduced between 15 and 16 November; and (2) the HDZ appealed the EASC Decision in cases 00-GE-105 and 00-GE-115. In regard to the counting complaint, the EASC investigation confirmed that the HDZ votes for the BiH House of Representatives were decreased between November 15 and 16, but the decrease was due to a data entry error which allocated a significant number of votes to the HDZ in error. The problem was rectified and the OSCE Counting Center was directed to contact political parties in the future when there was a significant change in the preliminary vote count due to data entry or other errors. In regard to the appeal of the HDZ in 00-GE-105 and 00-GE-115, the EASC noted that pursuant to Article 606 of the PEC Rules and Regulations, the decisions of the EASC are final and binding and cannot be appealed. The complaint was therefore dismissed.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-239: SDS Appeal of PEC Srebrenica Decision
In its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision in an appeal filed by the SDS from the November 15 Provisional Election Commission (PEC) decision on Srebrenica. The PEC decision found that the SDS was responsible for "large scale fraud or attempts of fraud" in connection with the election in the Srebrenica Municipality. The EASC noted that in considering appeals from PEC Decisions, the EASC is required to determine if the decision was contrary to law or whether it lacked a rational basis.
The EASC reviewed the documents and evidence relied on by the PEC and found that the PEC findings in regard to the activities that took place in the Srebrenica Municipality on election day were fully supported by the evidence. The EASC found, however, that the sanctions in the PEC Decision were disproportionate to the offenses proven and therefore lacked a rational basis. As part of the sanction in the decision, the PEC had removed one half of the mandates won by the SDS. The EASC modified the PEC decision to remove one third of the mandates won by the SDS in the Srebrenica municipality rather than one half of the mandates. All other aspects of the PEC Srebrenica decision remained the same.
For more information please call OSCE Spokesperson Luke Zahner at ++387/(0)33 292-449 or ++387/(0)66 144-311.
The Election Appeals Sub-Commission (EASC) was established by the Provisional Election Commission (PEC) in May of 1996. The EASC's mandate is to investigate and to adjudicate complaints involving violations of the PEC Rules and Regulations and other electoral provisions. As an independent juridical body, the EASC has the authority to receive complaints regarding the electoral process and to determine whether there has been a violation of either the PEC Rules or Regulations or the election provisions in the General Framework Agreement for Peace (GFAP, or the Dayton Peace Accords).
The EASC is granted plenary power to gather evidence. In addition, the EASC has the authority to sanction parties and candidates for violations of the PEC Rules and Regulations. The EASC has a range of sanctioning power, including, among other things, levying fines, removing candidates from a candidates list, removing an individual candidate from the ballot, prohibiting a political party or coalition from running in an election, decertifying a political party or coalition already listed on the ballot, and removing elected officials from office. The EASC retains discretionary power to determine appropriate penalties for actions that are intended to disrupt the electoral process. The EASC also has the authority to apply to the PEC for modifications of the PEC Rules and Regulations; however, no decision by the PEC shall have a retroactive impact upon the decisions of the EASC. The decisions of the EASC are final and binding and cannot be appealed.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-68 (Supplemental Decision): SDA Campaign Financing Requirements
At its session on 23 November, 2000, the EASC issued a supplemental decision on a referral from the PEC alleging that the account of the Organizacija Porodica Sehida I Poginulih Boraca (the "Organization") was in fact an undisclosed SDA account which received contributions which violated the Law on Party Financing and the PEC Rules and Regulations. In the supplemental decision, the EASC found that the Organization's account was under the direction and control of the SDA. The EASC did not, however, find evidence that contributions from public companies to the Organization were transferred to the SDA in violation of Article 1606 of the PEC Rules and Regulations, which prohibits contributions from public companies to political parties for campaign purposes.
Notwithstanding this decision, the EASC noted that there was considerable risk that the SDA would use contributions received by the Organization in the future for a political use. To lessen this risk and give substance to the SDA's claim that the Organization is an entirely separate entity, the EASC ordered that the SDA immediately divest itself of any direction and control of the Organization. The EASC directed the SDA to complete this divestment by November 30, 2000, and report the measures taken to the EASC by December 1, 2000.
The EASC also found that the SDA failed to properly disclose and itemize a contribution of 75,000 KM from the Organization as required by Article 1601 of PEC Rules and Regulations. The SDA's failure to properly disclose and itemize this contribution, despite specific requests from the PEC, constituted obstruction of the audit team. As a sanction, the first candidate from the SDA's candidates list for Federation Parliament House of Representatives, Constituency 407, was stricken.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-112 et. seq.: Travnik Municipality Polling Stations - Summary Decision
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a summary decision involving numerous cases of alleged fraud concentrated in six polling stations in the Travnik Municipality. The EASC conducted a thorough investigation of all complaints received and confiscated the polling station poll books and Central Voters Register as evidence in four polling stations in Nova Bila, one in Puticevo, and one in Delilovac.
The EASC investigation confirmed the numerous instances of violations presented through citizens' complaints, International Observers' reports, political party observers' complaints, and representatives of international organizations. The evidence clearly established a pattern of voter fraud in the six polling stations in question. The investigation confirmed that many of the irregularities were fashioned by the HDZ and designed to benefit the HDZ.
As sanction, the EASC censured the HDZ for organizing this pattern of fraudulent activity and struck the first candidate on the HDZ candidates list for the Cantonal Assembly, Canton 6. The EASC found that the polling station committees were directly responsible for participating in the instances of fraud. The EASC ordered that the salary of all members of these polling stations be withheld and forfeited, and further directed that none of these individuals be employed in any position connected to the election process in the future.EASC Case No. 00-GE-123 et. seq. : Polling Station Complaints-Summary Decision
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a Summary Decision containing 44 separate complaints alleging violations at various polling stations, or by polling station members, on election day. It has been the practice for the EASC to issue summary decisions for cases in which the EASC has no jurisdiction or which involve relatively minor violations.
Of these cases, 39 were dismissed based on insufficient evidence or failing to state a violation of the PEC Rules and Regulations. In five cases, the violation was found to be de minimus with no impact on the outcome of the elections. In each of these five cases, the polling station committee or the Municipal Election Committee took the appropriate steps in response to the violation. In one case, the EASC censured the Party of Democratic Action (SDA) for allowing its officials to represent themselves as OSCE officials and direct voters to vote for the SDA.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-148, et. seq.: Silence Period Violations - Summary Decision
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a summary decision containing ten separate cases which alleged violations of the "campaign silence period" established in the PEC Rules and Regulations. Several of these complaints contained multiple allegations. This is the second summary decision issued by the EASC on silence period violations. The EASC notes that the provisions regulating the "campaign silence period" changed between the municipal election and the general election, and many of the silence period complaints did not allege a violation of the new silence period provisions. It has been the practice of the EASC to issue summary decisions for cases in which the EASC has no jurisdiction or which involve relatively minor violations.
The EASC found that five of the allegations did not allege a violation of the campaign silence period and were dismissed on that basis. One allegation was dismissed on the basis of a lack of evidence. The EASC found violations of the Rules and Regulations in eight of the allegations. In six of these allegations the political party involved was censured. In two of the allegations, the nature of the violations were severe enough that the EASC struck a candidate in each instance.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-189: Exchange of Government Funds for Party Support
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision in response to a complaint filed by the New Croat Initiative (NHI). The complaint alleged that the Mayor of Usora, who is also president of the local Croat Democratic Union (HDZ), distributed 139,000 KM of "municipal funds" shortly before the general elections for the purpose of gaining votes for the HDZ.
The NHI claimed that the funds came from the Federation BiH government and were originally intended for other purposes. The EASC found that, although the timing of the distribution of these funds may have been beneficial to the HDZ, more evidence was required to make a finding that money was received in exchange for voter support. Moreover, it is not within the EASC's authority to determine whether the Mayor's distribution of the funds was in violation of local law and recommended that the case be referred to the appropriate officials for investigation. The EASC dismissed this complaint for insufficient evidence.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-227: Exchange of Government Funds for Party Support
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision in response to a complaint filed by the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in Orasje. The complaint alleged that the Cantonal Assembly of Canton 4, which is dominated by the HDZ, gave 50 KM to children of families whose parents are unemployed on the day before the election. The SDP alleged that this distribution of cantonal funds was designed to influence voters to vote for the HDZ and requested that the EASC "annul" elections in the municipalities of Orasje as well as in Odzak. The EASC found no direct evidence to support the SDP's claim. The timing of the distribution may have been beneficial for the HDZ, but more evidence was required to make a finding that the children of these unemployed adults received money in exchange for the adults' support at the polls. The EASC dismissed this complaint for insufficient evidence.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-190 (HDZ): Assault of NHI President
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision regarding a complaint from the New Croat Initiative Party (NHI) against the Croat Democratic Union (HDZ). The complaint alleged that Ivica Artmagic, the Vice President of the HDZ in Sivsa, threatened and assaulted Kresimir Zubak, the President of the NHI, after a NHI pre-election rally in the Municipality of Usora on 4 November 2000. The complaint also alleged that Mr. Artmagic threatened and assaulted Zvonko Jurisic, a NHI municipal councilor in Usora.
The EASC's investigation confirmed that Mr. Artmagic hit Mr. Zubak in the chest with his elbow while Zubak was leaving the hall where the rally was held. Mr. Artmagic also threatened to slap Mr. Zubak and threw a cigarette lighter at Mr. Jurisic. Mr. Artmagic then drew a gun from his belt, pointed it towards the ground and shouted "I'll shoot". The MUP reported that Mr. Artmagic was wearing a HDZ badge on this chest.
The EASC found that Mr. Artmagic violated Article 704 of the PEC Rules and Regulations by carrying and displaying a weapon at a NHI political meeting, and disturbing the gathering of another political party by threatening and assaulting Mr. Zubak and Mr. Jurisic. The EASC also found that the HDZ was responsible for the conduct of Mr. Artmagic, a representative and supporter of the party.
The EASC directed the HDZ and the HDZ Municipal Board in Usora to remove Mr. Artmagic from the Usora Municipal Board and from any other position he holds with the HDZ. Mr. Artmagic was also prohibited from further participation in the political process as a party officer, official or a candidate. Given the HDZ's attempt to mislead the OSCE regarding Mr. Artmagic's relationship with the party, the first candidate from the HDZ's candidates list for Cantonal Assembly, Canton, 4, Constituency 204 was stricken.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-233: Alleged Counting Irregularities
HSP At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision in response to a complaint from the Croat Party of Rights (HSP). The complaint alleged there was an "unbelievable difference" between the number of ballots cast in polling stations and the number of absentee ballots being counted in the Counting Center in Sarajevo. The EASC considered this complaint to be similar to the HDZ's complaint in EASC Case No. 00-GE-231 (November 18, 2000), in which the HDZ claimed a disproportionately high" number of absentee ballots were being counted for Canton 7 and a "disproportionately low" number for Canton 6. The EASC found insufficient evidence to support the allegations of fraud in the counting of absentee ballots for Cantons 6 and 7 and invited the complainant to review the EASC's decision in Case No. 00-GE-231. The complaint was dismissed.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-234: Alleged Counting Irregularities -SDA
At its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision in response to a complaint filed by the Party of Democratic Action (SDA). The complaint alleged: (1) that the Counting Center was not disclosing information about absentee ballots, (2) that the Counting Center is not performing validation tests of scanners as required by the PEC Rules and Regulations, and (3) that scanners are not reliable because of discrepancies found after a manual count of a batch of ballots from Out of Country (OCV). The SDA requested that all OCV batches be manually counted.
Following an investigation, the EASC found that the counting process employed by the Counting Center was transparent. The information the SDA was requesting was simply unknown and the question was most likely based on their observer's misunderstanding of the counting process. With respect to the second claim, the EASC found that the Counting Center was in full compliance with the PEC Rules and Regulations in testing scanners. Finally, although discrepancies did exist in the batch the SDA manually recounted, the discrepancies were found later to be not as significant as the SDA suggested. The Counting Center implemented additional precautions and repeated the manual count process for all batches in question to ensure accuracy. The EASC found insufficient evidence to order a manual recount and dismissed this complaint.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-238: HDZ Counting Appeal II and Appeal for Previous EASC Decisions
At it session on 23 November 2000, the EASC issued a decision in response to a complaint filed by the HDZ which contained two components: (1) the HDZ requested an explanation as to why the votes allocated to them in the BIH House of Representatives was reduced between 15 and 16 November; and (2) the HDZ appealed the EASC Decision in cases 00-GE-105 and 00-GE-115. In regard to the counting complaint, the EASC investigation confirmed that the HDZ votes for the BiH House of Representatives were decreased between November 15 and 16, but the decrease was due to a data entry error which allocated a significant number of votes to the HDZ in error. The problem was rectified and the OSCE Counting Center was directed to contact political parties in the future when there was a significant change in the preliminary vote count due to data entry or other errors. In regard to the appeal of the HDZ in 00-GE-105 and 00-GE-115, the EASC noted that pursuant to Article 606 of the PEC Rules and Regulations, the decisions of the EASC are final and binding and cannot be appealed. The complaint was therefore dismissed.
EASC Case No. 00-GE-239: SDS Appeal of PEC Srebrenica Decision
In its session on November 23, 2000, the EASC issued a decision in an appeal filed by the SDS from the November 15 Provisional Election Commission (PEC) decision on Srebrenica. The PEC decision found that the SDS was responsible for "large scale fraud or attempts of fraud" in connection with the election in the Srebrenica Municipality. The EASC noted that in considering appeals from PEC Decisions, the EASC is required to determine if the decision was contrary to law or whether it lacked a rational basis.
The EASC reviewed the documents and evidence relied on by the PEC and found that the PEC findings in regard to the activities that took place in the Srebrenica Municipality on election day were fully supported by the evidence. The EASC found, however, that the sanctions in the PEC Decision were disproportionate to the offenses proven and therefore lacked a rational basis. As part of the sanction in the decision, the PEC had removed one half of the mandates won by the SDS. The EASC modified the PEC decision to remove one third of the mandates won by the SDS in the Srebrenica municipality rather than one half of the mandates. All other aspects of the PEC Srebrenica decision remained the same.
For more information please call OSCE Spokesperson Luke Zahner at ++387/(0)33 292-449 or ++387/(0)66 144-311.
The Election Appeals Sub-Commission (EASC) was established by the Provisional Election Commission (PEC) in May of 1996. The EASC's mandate is to investigate and to adjudicate complaints involving violations of the PEC Rules and Regulations and other electoral provisions. As an independent juridical body, the EASC has the authority to receive complaints regarding the electoral process and to determine whether there has been a violation of either the PEC Rules or Regulations or the election provisions in the General Framework Agreement for Peace (GFAP, or the Dayton Peace Accords).
The EASC is granted plenary power to gather evidence. In addition, the EASC has the authority to sanction parties and candidates for violations of the PEC Rules and Regulations. The EASC has a range of sanctioning power, including, among other things, levying fines, removing candidates from a candidates list, removing an individual candidate from the ballot, prohibiting a political party or coalition from running in an election, decertifying a political party or coalition already listed on the ballot, and removing elected officials from office. The EASC retains discretionary power to determine appropriate penalties for actions that are intended to disrupt the electoral process. The EASC also has the authority to apply to the PEC for modifications of the PEC Rules and Regulations; however, no decision by the PEC shall have a retroactive impact upon the decisions of the EASC. The decisions of the EASC are final and binding and cannot be appealed.