[ad_1]
All interlocutors of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) expressed “confidence in the electoral process and in the ability of the electoral administration to manage the elections in a professional, impartial and transparent manner”.
We read in the report on the Republic of San Marino that most interlocutors welcomed “possible observation activities by ODIHR, recognizing the value and importance of external assessments for improving the electoral process”.
In particular, some aspects could be further aligned with the OSCE’s commitment to international standards, including provisions on electoral rights, campaign regulation and election observation.
However, given the short lead time and the human and financial resources already committed this year, ODIHR was unable to observe the early parliamentary elections on 9 June. Nevertheless, ODIHR stands ready to assist the Republic of San Marino with any future electoral reforms, including a review of the current electoral legislation.
Election controversy
The resolution of electoral disputes is governed by the electoral law and other relevant rules. Complaints, including those related to voter and candidate registration, are dealt with through the ordinary judicial process for administrative offenses and are final. Violations of electoral rights may be subject to criminal sanctions, including up to ten years in prison and deprivation of the right to vote.
Most election-related appeals do not have specific deadlines, but these matters are dealt with expeditiously. All ODIHR NAM interlocutors expressed general confidence in the electoral dispute resolution mechanism and the impartiality of the judiciary.
iMedia
The constitution guarantees freedom of expression. The legislation prohibits censorship and provides for the right to access information. Defamation remains subject to criminal sanctions, and while ODIHR NAM interlocutors noted that sanctions are rare and that rulings have historically protected journalists’ rights, some fear that pending civil defamation cases may lead journalists to self-censor. Respondents also noted recent incidents of politicians verbally attacking journalists. The Information Guarantee Agency monitors audiovisual media for compliance with the law and has investigative and sanctioning powers; however, its regulatory powers do not include social networking sites, which remain largely unregulated. The agency does not have a clear responsibility to monitor campaign coverage during elections.
[ad_2]
Source link
