Myanmar | Opposition: government delaying results deliberately

Supporters of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party cheer as they watch the results of the general election on an LED screen displayed outside the party’s headquarters Monday

Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s party, which appears headed for a massive election victory, accused the government election panel yesterday of intentionally delaying results, saying it may be trying “to play a trick.”
However, in an interview with the BBC, Suu Kyi did not repeat the claims by her party, only noting that the military-backed government has promised to respect the will of the people. She also said the party expects to win around 75 percent of the seats in Parliament.
The surprising accusation by the National League for Democracy added a worrying twist to what had been an amicable election, with the ruling party appearing to be taking its expected loss gracefully after the Sunday vote.
“The Union Election Commission has been delaying intentionally because maybe they want to play a trick or something,” NLD spokesman Win Htien told reporters at Suu Kyi’s house after a party meeting. “It doesn’t make sense that they are releasing the results piece by piece. It shouldn’t be like that.”
“They are trying to be crooked,” he added.
Nearly two full days after voting ended, the election commission, which did not immediately respond to the accusation, has released results for only 83 seats in the 664-member Parliament, giving 74 to the NLD and four to the ruling party.
Based on its own counting, the NLD has claimed victory in 154 of the 164 seats in four of the country’s 14 states. In addition, the commission announced that the NLD had won 11 of 15 seats in four regional parliaments.
The accusation raises questions about the intentions of the ruling Union Solidarity Development Party, which is beholden to the military that ruled the country with an iron grip from 1962 until 2011. Since 2011, the USDP, largely made up of former junta members, has been led by President Thein Sein, a former general who has been praised for beginning political and economic reforms to end Myanmar’s isolation and jump-start its moribund economy.
It is also disconcerting because in 1990 elections, which the NLD won overwhelmingly, the junta refused to recognize the results.
In the BBC interview, Suu Kyi was asked why, given the events of 1990, things will be different this time.
“They’ve been saying repeatedly they’ll respect the will of the people and that they will implement the results of the election,” she said.
She also said the people are far more aware now than in 1990.
“The times are different, the people are different … very much more alert to what is going on around them. And then of course there’s the communications revolution which has made a huge difference. Everybody gets on to the net and informs everybody else of what is happening, and so it’s much more difficult for those who wish to engage in irregularities to get away with it,” she said.
Observers also believe that the military had little to gain by interfering again, because as part of reforms to allow gradual democracy it has already secured its position with constitutionally guaranteed powers.
For example, no matter who forms the government, the military gets to keep control of the ministries of defense, interior and border security. It controls large parts of the national economy. Also, the military can block constitutional amendments because 25 percent of the seats in Parliament are reserved for it. Amendments require more than a 75 percent vote.
The NLD is widely expected to finish with the most seats in Parliament. A two-thirds majority would give it control over the executive posts under Myanmar’s complicated parliamentary-presidency system.
The military and the largest parties in the upper house and the lower house will each nominate a candidate for president. After Jan. 31, all 664 legislators will cast ballots and the top vote-getter will become president, while the other two will be vice presidents. A massive majority in Parliament would allow the NLD to take the presidency and one of the vice president slots.
Capturing the presidency and Parliament would give the NLD power over legislation, economic policy and foreign relations. But a constitutional provision bars anyone with a foreign spouse or child from being president or vice president, meaning Suu Kyi, 70, is not eligible for those posts. Her two sons are British, as was her late husband.
Suu Kyi has said, however, that she will act as the country’s leader if the NLD wins the presidency, saying she will be “above the president.”
In a reflection of the reverence that many people here have for Suu Kyi, a woman in her 70s came to her house yesterday to give the opposition leader a ruby brooch set in gold, shaped like Myanmar’s map.
Htay Htay Aye told reporters, “I’ve kept this brooch for more than 40 years but it’s time for her to wear it. This is a present for her victory.”
Suu Kyi was in a meeting and couldn’t meet the woman. “But I left her that present. It’s not because we are friends, it’s only because I respect her,” Htay Htay Aye said. Esther Htusan and Vijay Joshi, Yangon, AP

Carter Center finds voting fair

A team of election observers led by former U.S. President Jimmy Carter’s grandson says that while the voting process in Myanmar’s election on Sunday was a success, the country’s transition to democracy remains incomplete.
The Carter Center said in a statement issued yesterday that it fielded 62 monitors who observed 245 polling stations, and found the voting and counting process to be generally well-conducted. It described the elections in most areas as “competitive and meaningful.”
The group noted several problems with the process, however, including barring members of the country’s Rohingya minority from voting, a lack of transparency in the advance voting process and inconsistency in making preliminary results available at the constituency level.
Jason Carter also highlighted “serious flaws in the overall constitutional framework,” a reference to provisions in the military-imposed charter that reserve powers for the army at the expense of the elected.