Turkish election rigged

A voter casts his ballot at a polling station during the runoff for the first round of parliamentary elections in Giza governorate, Egypt, Oct. 27, 2015. (photo by REUTERS/Mohamed Abd El Ghany)

Egypt elections runoff overshadowed by election fraud

CAIRO — After fierce competition among 418 candidates on individual seats, the runoff of Egypt’s parliamentary elections determined the results of the first phase in which the candidates of political parties won the largest proportions of individual seats.

Summary⎙ Print Egypt political parties win the largest proportions of individual seats in the first phase of Egypt’s parliamentary elections tainted by allegations of vote-rigging.
Author Ayah AmanPosted October 30, 2015

TranslatorPascale el-Khoury

The runoff of the first phase of the parliamentary elections held Oct. 27-28 covered 14 governorates, where 418 candidates competed for 209 seats. Only four candidates managed to clinch an individual seat in the first round, while the runoff elections in four constituencies will start over after being canceled by court orders. These constituencies are al-Raml First and al-Raml Second in Alexandria, al-Wasta, Bandar Beni Suef and Beni Suef precinct and Damanhour district and precinct in Behira.

Electoral observers and Egypt’s Cabinet operations room noted that the elections runoff was overshadowed by political money and vote-buying at prices ranging from 50 Egyptian pounds ($7) to 700 Egyptian pounds ($87) per vote. These prices were offered by the agents of some candidates to push voters to head to the polls and vote in favor of their candidate.

Tarek Zaghloul, the executive manager at the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights, involved in monitoring elections, told Al-Monitor, “Widespread phenomena of vote-buying and directing voters were the most noted infringements and violations that occurred during the two-day runoff.”

He said, “The phenomenon of political money almost disappeared in the 2010 parliamentary elections, prior to the January 25 Revolution, but [in these elections] it made a strong comeback given that most candidates are businessmen and in light of the extreme electoral low turnout.”

He added, “It was very difficult to prove bribes although they were offered publicly in front of polling stations, since the candidates’ agents used force and prevented anyone from taking photos or filming them. However, we filed reports to the High Elections Committee [HEC] on these violations.”

Despite a number of evidenced vote-buying operations documented on video that spread on news sites and social media, the spokesman for the HEC, Judge Amro Marwan, stated in a press conference following the closure of the polling stations on the evening of Oct. 28, “We know there are violations, but the HEC has yet to receive formal complaints to be able to take appropriate action.”

These violations prompted some independent candidates to withdraw during the second day of voting Oct. 28, in protest against lack of equal opportunities between them and those using political money to harvest more votes.

Yasser al-Qadi, a candidate running in the 6th of October district, who had won 5,500 votes in the first round, submitted an official letter to the HEC announcing his withdrawal from the electoral race. He told Al-Monitor, “I withdrew in protest against the flagrant violations by fellow candidates assisted by the police department in the electoral constituency. They prevented my agents from entering polling stations and mobilized voters against me.”

He added, “Before the revolution, any parliamentary election candidate had to be backed by the National Democratic Party, but now he must be on good terms with the security services and police.”

The withdrawals from the elections had started since the announcement by the HEC of the results of the first round Oct. 21. The Call of Egypt list was the first to pull out of parliamentary polls Oct. 24. In a press conference, the list described the electoral campaign as vitiated by political fraud and numerous violations.

Results of the first phase

The results of the elections’ first phase showed that political parties were way ahead in terms of individual seats following a sweeping victory by For the Love of Egypt list, backed by the political administration in the constituencies of West Delta and Upper Egypt, where 125 partisan candidates gained parliamentary seats compared to 84 independent candidates.

The results of the primary vote count at the polling stations and subelectoral commissions in the runoff on individual seats emerged. The Free Egyptians Party had won 36 seats in single-member constituencies in the first phase in addition to five seats on the For the Love of Egypt list in West Delta and Upper Egypt, which is the largest number of seats gained by the political parties.

Noteworthy is the substantial financial support for the Free Egyptians Party backed by Egyptian businessman Naguib Sawiris, who said in a press statement Oct. 28 after the issuance of the results, “I expected these results despite all the attack and distortion campaigns. Our first objective is to eradicate poverty.”

Shehab Wajih, the spokesman for the Free Egyptians Party, commented on the result and told Al-Monitor, “The party is very satisfied with the number of seats obtained in the first round. The candidates fielded by the party in the runoff of the elections will continue the race in the same spirit of optimism.”

Egypt’s Mostaqbal Watan Party (Future of Nation), running the parliamentary elections for the first time, came second to the Free Egyptians Party. The party obtained 30 seats, and the six candidates it fielded in the West Delta and Upper Egypt lists also won. This party is expected to compete in the second phase of elections on an additional 96 seats.

The Wafd Party obtained 17 seats. Yasser Hassan, head of the Wafd Party’s media committee, told Al-Monitor, “We were expecting this result for many reasons, including the party’s refusal to resort to the use of political money and bribes in favor of its candidates. Moreover, Wafd candidates have substantial influence in the first phase constituencies, [Delta and Cairo].”

Despite the controversy about the Nour Party candidates, their threat to pull out from the elections to object the loss of the party’s list in the first phase, their attempts to mobilize voters and their use of political money to buy votes, the party won only 11 seats in the runoff.

Hassan Nafaa, political science professor at Cairo University, told Al-Monitor, “Competition between political parties during the first electoral round did not reflect a real democratic diversity, especially since all these parties represented one political spectrum that supports President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.”

He added, “The use by parties of political money to back their candidates means they are competing on political interests. This justifies the significant low turnout of voters in these elections.”

Nafaa explained, “The loss by the Salafist Nour Party of its popularity is expected as a result of its pro-regime positions. Moreover, the party lost many of its popular bases, and this is evidenced by the fact that its list lost the elections in West Delta where it had a large electoral base in the 2011 elections.”

At the end of the first phase of the elections, a political faction (in reference to most of the candidates who won) strongly backed by Sisi obtained the largest proportion of parliamentary seats so far, amid expectations of similar results in the second phase.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/10/egypt-first-phase-elections-vote-rigging.html#ixzz3qNEiR7fp

Sunday, 1 November 2015

ELECTION RIGGED IN TURKEY, NOVEMBER 2015

 burnt ballot papers in Turkey 1

 

Turkish election November 2015 – burnt ballot papers. LiveLeak.com.

The November 2015 election in Turkey, won by the secretly pro-Israel Erdogan, was rigged.

The opinion polls had suggested that Erdogan would lose.

“Nearly all opinion polls indicate that the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) will again fail to get the parlaimentary seats needed to form a majority government.”

burnt ballot papers in Turkey 3

Turkish elections to produce another inconclusive result

Turkish election November 2015 – burnt ballot papers. LiveLeak.com.
There are many reports of people being barred from voting.

“I went to the polling station with my mother but … they didn’t let us even vote.”

burnt ballot papers in Turkey 2

problems voting in Turkey election
Burnt ballot papers. LiveLeak.com.

The results were decided before the vote was counted.

“Presiding ballot officers in some provinces – including İstanbul and Ankara – asked ballot officers to sign blank documents on election results that are supposed to be filled in following the vote count.”

Erdogan_waving_flag_of_Palestine_to_get_simpathy_of_his_voters_while_keep_Turkey's_ties_with_Israel_&_US

Abundant claims of vote rigging.

Azadiya Welat wrote of the Turkish election: “They counted 57million votes in just 2 hours(manually) and the only party (HDP) that was rising in the polls and truely promotes peace in the country suddenly lost to the dictators party which gained almost 10 million votes in 3 months…. which is nearly impossible.”

Can Karesi wrote of the Turkish election: “What democracy? Elections, that is a laugh, powercuts, tv stations closed, election organizations and websites hacked, money exchanging hands, hundreds of arrests, newspaper websites censored…”

See how mainstream media tries to cover over the clear-cut truth of deception.

Women wave flags outside Justice and Development Party headquarters in Ankara, Turkey, Nov. 1, 2015. Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu described the outcome of the general election that swept his AK Party back to a parliamentary majority on Sunday as a victory for democracy.  (photo by REUTERS/Umit Bektas)

How the AKP dominated yesterday’s election in Turkey

Turkey’s Nov. 1 snap elections ended with a result that almost no one expected: a crushing, fourth consecutive victory for the Justice and Development Party (AKP), which has now been in power since 2002. The party won 49.4% of the vote, a major increase over the 40.9% it won in the previous elections, held June 7. The AKP has a comfortable majority in the parliament, holding 316 of the 550 seats. It now has enough power to form a government on its own, avoiding coalition scenarios for the next four years. The final seat count, however, fell short of giving the AKP the chance to amend the constitution on its own, which requires at least 330 seats.

Summary⎙ Print While the Justice and Development Party was projected to win in Turkey’s Nov. 1 polls, a concurrence of factors led to an unexpected sweeping victory.
Author Mustafa AkyolPosted November 2, 2015

How did the AKP pull off such a major victory, defying the predictions of almost all polling companies and political observers? I had predicted “some increase in the AKP votes,” but nothing this major. To understand what happened, one has to look at what changed in Turkey during the past five months, since the previous elections.

The first major change was an upsurge in terrorism, by the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) and the Islamic State, and an accompanying sense of diminishing security. The second change was a decline in the economy, in particular a surge by the US dollar at the expense of the Turkish lira. Many critics, in the Turkish opposition as well as the Western media, blamed the AKP government and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan for both of these problems. Many Turks, however, viewed things to the contrary. To them, these problems had been caused by the absence of a strong AKP government since June 7. The 13 stable years Turkey experienced under AKP has helped create a longing for that same stability under yet another strong AKP government.

Meanwhile, two opposition parties faced major problems in the past few months, leading to a significant decline in votes for them. The problem for the Nationalist Action Party (MHP) was Devlet Bahceli, its leader. Bahceli disillusioned a large number of MHP voters by bluntly rejecting every coalition option after the June elections and offering nothing more than hawkishness against Kurdish nationalists. Hence, the MHP turned out to be the biggest loser in the election, having won 16.4% of the vote (80 seats) in June, but only 11.9% (40 seats) in November. It is safe to assume that almost all of the MHP’s lost votes went to the AKP.

This was helped along by the AKP consciously playing to the MHP’s base, which is already considered the closest to its own. Both parties, by very broad definitions, are right wing and conservative. The AKP’s latter-day toughness on Kurdish militants also helped win nationalist hearts and minds. Moreover, the AKP managed to poach a major MHP figure, Tugrul Turkes, the son of Alparslan Turkes, none other than the founder of the MHP movement.

The other opposition party suffering a setback was the polar opposite of the MHP: the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP). In June, the HDP had scored a major victory, safely passing the 10% threshold, winning 13.1% of the votes (80 seats), doubling its traditional mandate. On Nov. 1, however, the HDP only managed to attract 10.7% of the vote (61 seats). Why did it lose so much?

One factor is that some of the votes it had won in June were “borrowed votes” — that is, the votes of people who simply wanted the party to pass the 10% threshold but this time did not vote strategically, assuming that the party would safely pass the threshold. The even more definitive factor was the failure of the “peace process” between Ankara and the armed and outlawed PKK, which both Turkey and the United States consider a terrorist organization. The resurgence of the three-decade-old war in July put the HDP in a tough spot, torn between its liberal narrative of peace and its obvious sympathy for the PKK. As a result, some religious Kurdish voters, who blamed the PKK for the resurgence of violence, returned to the AKP. The HDP lost more than a million of the votes it had won in June, and it appears that almost all of them went to the ruling party.

The AKP also seems to have attracted additional support from the base of smaller Islamist parties, which either shrank (as in the case of the Felicity Party) or did not enter the election to support the AKP (as in the case of the Kurdish Islamist Huda-Par.) The only party that saw no changes was the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), which won 25.4% of the vote (134 seats). The CHP seems to have a safe, solid, but static voting block, consisting mainly of urban secularists and unorthodox Alevis.

The election results represent a huge victory for the AKP, and even more so for Erdogan, who was the real mastermind behind the snap elections. His grip on power will be rock solid until 2019. Of course, this is incredibly blissful for AKP supporters, but what does it mean for opposition circles, which have of late been demonized by the government and its propaganda machine as the enemy within? Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, in his victory speech, sent a reconciliatory message to them, promising an “end to polarization and tension.” If he and Erdogan really chose a moderate and reconciliatory path, then they will be achieving a much bigger victory than in the actual elections.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/11/turkey-elections-akp-unexpected-victory-erdogan.html#ixzz3qNDqf8Bq

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

3 Responses to “Turkish election rigged”

  1. Lynn says:

    The whole lot are rigged now. Perhaps they always were. These Bankers know how to play this game, they have been at it for a lot longer than we realise. They are the true conspiracy.

  2. beLIEve says:

    I think we would all be better off if we simply…REGISTERED OUR DISSENT …with …UNLAWFUL GOVERNMENT.

    As Lynn says, they are all rigged now.

    This means everything the “gov” does is ..UNLAWFUL..because they have ..USURPED… Sovereign powers !

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.