Anar Mamedkhanov: The post - election situation was predictable

How could you evaluate pre-election and post election situation in the country?

The pre-election situation was way freer than it was during the previous elections. However, it would be useful to mention, that amount of offences, slander and false was also bigger this time. Sometimes it seemed that the pre-election campaign was a process of vendetta between candidates.

I would like to mention that for the whole company, during my meetings with electorate I have not even called my rivals’ names even though I became a target for waterfalls of mud and offences. I would be silent and would not pay attention to this counting it as side effects of the profession and the campaign if the articles where it was done would not mention my parents and even my 11 years old son. I have never seen something like that although at the beginning of the campaign I fought that may be in my precinct I will be able to avoid such outrages things.

I was stating from the beginning that the life will not stop on November 6. We are young people and we will see each other, we are children of one country, and that we Azerbaijanis should not offend each other, especially members of our families, but unfortunately I was not heard.

Many our people consider an intelligence to be a synonym of weakness while rudeness is ascribed as self-confidence. Let the Lord judge them.

Regarding the post election situation it was predictable and awaited since the opposition declared, not even at the beginning of the campaign but as soon as the year 2005 started that it will not recognize the Elections and will protest in case if it will not win them. That is why there was not surprising at all. It would be unnatural for our opposition to accept their defeat.

But you probably will not deny the fact that the elections were “slightly” not fair and honest?

- Of course I will not. The Elections passed as they should have passed in today’s situation. It would be na?ve to demand absolutely fair elections from us. In order to do we should undergo that a process of crystallization of political culture, which will pass simultaneously in opposition and executive bodies. In the situation when the sides evaluate each other not as rivals but as enemies this process will never start.

On another hand , if we will look at the election process itself the opposition chose very simple and impressing, however not effective tactics. From the early beginning of the Elections, especially on the day of the Elections, they attacked international observers with different kinds of concerns and since neither OSCE nor other structures did not posses time to evaluate them and that is why just recorded them as violations. It is the same as if I file a concern on you and you are arrested without a trial.

According to opposition there were about 20 thousand of violations, so it means that they should file not less than 20 thousand concerns and it will take years to scrutinize all of them. Unfortunately the international organizations are working in a sprinter mode when solving the problems and the authorities are right now in a defensive position since even if they want they are unable to resolve all 20 thousand of concerns.

Could you comment on the results of the exit-polls in your precinct?

- Well, firstly I would like to say that there were several organizations there who run the exit-polls but I would guess that you are interested of my opinion regarding the exit-poll done by PA Consulting.

I have no doubts in the professionalism of the high ranking employees of the company and have no doubts about their good intentions but in some polling stations the work done by this reputable company causes some questions.

Firstly, we all know that exit-poll is done on the exit from the polling station. In the 30 precinct this main principle was broken since interviewers at 5 polling stations of this precinct were right inside of the polling stations and were making “inside” poll and it is probably that could make also an “enter-poll”. I repeat that it is a violation of the main principle of the exit-poll.
Secondly, anybody who at least have read two pages from a high school course of sociology know that a level of arithmetic mistake in the worst cases makes 3 percents. In my precinct, according to PA Consulting it is equal to 22 percent. I would like to ask those who have an idea about the subject of the conversation to try recall if they ever heard of exit-polls to have such a mistake? Could you imagine that some famous company would state that Bush gained either 30 percent or 52 percent?

Personally I can explain it only by a failure of interviewers presented at the spots and the decision of high ranking managers being forced by it, to accept such a difference. It could be 90 percents as well since as I said a difference of more than 3 percents does not exist in sociological polls.

Day.Az