Turkey’s elections were marked by the lack of a level playing field and irregularities, according to a delegation of European MPs, who served as observers of the parliamentary and presidential showdown that took place in May.

The findings of the election observation mission were published in a report released on June 19 by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE).

The report noted “an overall repressive environment” mounted against the opposition and a “lack of transparency and genuine communication” shown by Turkey’s Supreme Electoral Council (YSK).

Cited irregularities included “a lack of level playing field during the campaign, characterised by misuse of administrative resources, biased media coverage, and restrictions to freedoms of expression and media”.

Also during the elections, certain issues remained unregulated or under-regulated, including the composition and mandate of ballot box committees, eligibility for party observers, the reallocation of campaign venues and registration for out-of-country and mobile voting, the report said.

Out of line with its legally prescribed composition, the YSK, meanwhile, was said to have acted as an 11-member body, allowing all substitute members to participate in its sessions and vote. The sessions were not open to the public and, despite the YSK’s legal obligation to publish all its decisions, only around 11% were published.

Other conclusions in the report released by PACE were as follows:

Voter lists contained voters missing due to the February earthquake catastrophe that hit parts of southern Turkey. An estimated 2mn voters were displaced due to the earthquakes, and the authorities undertook only limited measures to facilitate address changes and voting for those affected.

On May 14, during the parliamentary election and first round of the presidential poll, the delegations sent by PACE—an organisation founded in 1949 to uphold human rights, democracy and the rule of law—observed the election process in 18 locations. The prescribed closing procedures were not completed correctly in close to half of the observations before the start of the count.

The ballot box committees did not consistently count the number of signatures and fingerprints in the voter lists in 12 instances or record these numbers in the protocol at this stage in 38 instances.

Unused envelopes and ballots were not counted in 23 instances.

In 23 polling stations, the committees did not post copies of the protocols for public display; however, in all but three cases, copies of protocols were provided upon request.

Contrary to the law, the envelopes were not counted twice in 55 instances and their validity was not consistently checked in 27 instances or were not recorded in the protocol in 23 instances.

In 27 instances, not all ballots cast for each party were properly counted and separated and not all data was correctly entered in the protocol in 10 instances.

In 18 cases, persons other than the committee members participated in the count, raising concerns over the integrity of the count.

Official protocols were pre-signed by the committee members in 15 instances.

In 21 observed polling stations, the ballot box committees had difficulties in reconciling the results in the results protocol.

The PACE observers generally attributed the procedural shortcomings primarily to the committees’ attempt to speedily finalise the counting process.

Discrepancies in some of the results protocols submitted by the committees were observed in nine locations visited. In 24 cases, the ballot box committees were correcting their protocols without a formal district committee decision.

In eight instances, observers were restricted in their observations. In nine cases, other observers were prevented from following the tabulation of results.

In the hours following the count, in the absence of official information from the YSK, the media began reporting results, causing uncertainty.

The PACE observers noted a strong presence of police in the places visited.

The media reported that a large number of complaints were lodged with election bodies alleging improperly stamped ballots and the committee members marking ballots as well as proxy and multiple voting.

Some criminal complaints, investigations and arrests for campaign activities in and around polling stations, fraudulent voting and physical attacks were reported by the media.

Following the elections, representatives of some opposition parties expressed concerns about alleged election day irregularities, mainly during counting and tabulation.

Multiple parties filed numerous complaints and appeals to relevant election bodies. The YSK did not publish information on complaints filed during election day.

“However, no contestant publicly questioned the results that were announced by the YSK,” the PACE report also noted.

Incomprehensible

This last point needs some particular focus, writes bne IntelliNews. It is the incomprehensible feature seen in all the big elections staged by Turkey for the past six years, with the exceptions of the 2019 Istanbul election and election re-run. At the conclusion of both of those contests, in which city opposition activists organised tight scrutiny of voting and the vote count, the Erdogan regime had to admit defeat.

The usual scenario produces a situation in which the alarm over irregularities is sounded all around, but the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) nevertheless affirms the legality of the election results. Then it has nothing to say, and does nothing, when its rival declares victory.

The PACE observers monitored the presidential second-round run-off vote, held on May 28, in 10 locations. Group or family voting, as well as potential compromises in the layout of some polling stations that were a threat to the secrecy of the vote, were observed.

The observers were even denied access to polling stations in some instances and were not permitted to observe the data entry for the out-of-country voting.

Twelve unauthorised individuals taking part in ballot box committee operations were noted by observers. During the count, several procedural shortcomings were observed, mainly due to the omission of important reconciliation procedures.

The announcement of the final parliamentary results was delayed until after the runoff poll, breaking the deadline previously established by the YSK.

The YSK did not publish the relevant decision or inform all stakeholders on the postponement of the announcement, including lower-level electoral councils, in a timely manner. Nor did it release results disaggregated per polling station prior to the announcement of the final results, missing an opportunity to address public concerns over alleged discrepancies in the tabulated results.

These steps undermined the transparency of the results announcement, and the voter’s ability to be informed about the process.

Similar to previous elections, accreditation requests from civil society organisations were rejected by the YSK. Many civil society organisations, including Oy ve Otesi (Vote and Beyond), Turkish Volunteers, Human Rights Association and the Association for Monitoring Equal Rights focused on election day observation and parallel vote tabulation were accredited as political party observers or they worked without accreditation.

Two members of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Parliamentary Assembly who wished to observe elections, namely Soren Sondergaard (Denmark) and Kadir Kasirga (Sweden), were refused accreditation as observers.

The special co-ordinator of the OSCE short-term observer mission Michael Georg Link and head of the OSCE PA delegation Farah Karimi have said that the inviting country should refrain from trying to influence the composition of an election observation mission.

Turkey’s legal framework does not fully provide a sound legal basis for the conduct of democratic elections. Most of the Venice Commission and OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) recommendations, including those related to voter rights and election dispute resolution, have remained unaddressed. The situation is the same with numerous rulings of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

The Constitution, adopted under martial law in 2017, does not sufficiently guarantee the rights and freedoms that underpin democratic elections, as it focuses on prohibitions to protect the state and permits legislation that imposes further undue limitations, according to the election observation report.

A July 2018 legal amendment granted governors the power to limit certain rights and freedoms for up to 15-day periods (extendable if the governor thinks it is necessary) on the basis of protecting public order or security, a power that previously existed only under a declared state of emergency.

An “undeclared” state of emergency is in fact in effect in Turkey. On July 25, 2018, bne IntelliNews noted: “A security law granting broader authority to local governors, extended detention periods and powers to dismiss public servants was approved in the Turkish parliament on July 25. The two-year-old state of emergency imposed after the failed 2016 coup was brought to an end at midnight on July 18 but the new security law has extended emergency powers on a permanent basis, leading critics to ask whether the emergency regime is truly over.”

Turkish legislation does not contain comprehensive regulations on party and campaign finance, something which has significantly reduced stakeholders’ trust in the integrity and accountability of the regulatory system.

Most longstanding recommendations of the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) remain unaddressed, including on the introduction of spending limits, enhancing transparency and improving the effectiveness of the oversight mechanism.

The candidacy of the incumbent president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, was officially challenged by more than 200 stakeholders, asserting that he was running for an unconstitutional third term. One application was subsequently submitted to the European Court of Human Rights.

Women remain underrepresented in Turkish politics and leadership positions. In the outgoing parliament, 100 of the 577 members (17%) were women. Out of 17 ministers, only one was a woman. Only 3% of mayors, 2% of village heads and 11% of local councillors are women.

In 2021, the country withdrew from the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combatting violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention).