2004 LOCAL ELECTIONS: AN EXERCISE IN . . .?

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 HANOI 001116 SIPDIS SENSITIVE STATE FOR EAP/BCLTV E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV VM DPOL SUBJECT: 2004 LOCAL ELECTIONS: AN EXERCISE IN . . .? REF: A. 02 Hanoi 1286 B. 01 Hanoi 2964 C. 02 Hanoi 1199 ¶1. (U) Summary: Vietnam's April 25 elections for People's Councils will be - on paper - more open and representational than in previous years. The elections are the first since the passage of revisions to the Law on Election of Deputies to People's Councils in November 2003, and will be marked by higher numbers of female and minority candidates, more candidates per position, and fewer party members standing for seats. Nonetheless, the whole process remains tightly controlled by the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV),which, through the Vietnam Fatherland Front (VFF),determined who could and could not run. The results - while perhaps more diverse - will not enhance more genuine grass-roots democracy nor local empowerment. Public apathy remains high. End Summary ¶2. (U) Nationwide elections on April 25 will select People's Councils at the provincial, district, and local levels for a five-year term. The councils act as local legislatures; their part-time members have oversight over projects and budgets at each respective levels of government. (Ref b examined the evolving role of the People's Councils.) More importantly, they vote on members of the People's Committees, which run the daily affairs of the local governments. There is also usually overlap between the Committees and the Councils, often with the Chairman of the Committee acting as a Vice Chairman of the Council, and the Chairman of the Council serving as a Vice Chairman of the Committee. ¶3. (U) The GVN has launched a large public relations campaign related to the elections, newspapers regularly feature stories about the elections, voter lists have been displayed in precinct polling stations for public corrections, and billboards ("Voting is the right and duty of citizens") have gone up across the country as part of a get-out-the-vote campaign. In many cases, local officials have even distributed candidate lists and biographies door to door. Based on historical precedent, the campaign will likely be "successful." According to official statistics, in the 2002 National Assembly elections voter turnout was 99.73%, with most casting their votes before 10a.m. (Ref a). ¶4. (U) The electoral process is highly structured and largely implemented by the VFF, the party-controlled umbrella organization which supervises all major mass organizations, leagues, religious groups, and unions; even the CPV itself belongs. The elections, which take place once every five years, were officially announced 105 days before the vote is to take place. Candidates were then chosen by a three-step consultative process. In the first round, VFF committees at each level met and suggested possible candidates, and also solicited additional names of possible candidates from government offices, mass organizations, and neighborhood leaders. Based on these discussions and suggestions, the VFF committees then met a second time to draw up a possible list of candidates, which it sent to neighborhoods and mass organizations for comments. At this stage, individuals were can also able to nominate themselves, or - in a provision added under the new electoral law - neighborhoods could put forth a specific candidate. Finally, the VFF met a third time to review all the names, and created the final list of candidates 35 days before Election Day. The VFF conducts the electoral campaigns by organizing public meetings for candidates, as well as by arranging the dissemination of information about the candidates through the media. Candidates generally do not undertake individual campaigns and do not have specific funds for the election. On Election Day, voters will be presented with a list of possible candidates for their constituency, and may cast as many votes are there are seats. Typically, the there are five candidates for three positions, but this varies somewhat depending on the population of a constituency, as well as between urban and rural areas. ¶5. (U) Amendments to the Law on Election of Deputies of People's Councils were passed on November 26, 2003. Potentially the most significant of these is that blocks of citizens - the size or nature of which is undefined - can nominate candidates. Previously, candidates could only be nominated by members of the VFF, or by individuals nominating themselves. According to a UNDP advisor working on a project to strengthen the capacity of elected bodies, this change could potentially lead to better ties and more accountability between representatives and a section of the electorate. Another new change is that there now must be at least two more candidates than positions for voters to choose from. Previously the law had only stipulated that there must be more candidates than positions, which was frequently meant only one extra, who was often just filler - too young or inexperienced to appeal to voters. There are on average 1.9 candidates per position in this year's election. ¶6. (U) In addition to the legal changes, the VFF has the explicit mandate to improve the "quality and proportion" of candidates. According to Tran Ngoc Nhan, an elections expert at the VFF, the VFF's new "six increases and one decrease" policy was aimed at increasing the number of candidates who are under the age of 35, women, non-CPV members, ethnic minorities, members of religious groups, and private businesspeople, and decreasing the number of candidates who are current government employees. Figures vary from province to province, but overall, on the final lists include 32% of candidates who are women, 20% minorities, 20.5% under 35 years old, 5.5% from the private business sector, and 3.5% from religious groups. Party members still account for the majority of candidates, making up 58% of local candidates, 74% of district-level candidates, and 76% of provincial candidates. These indeed represent some increases for women, youth, and minorities, but little change since the last election in the number of Party member candidates, according to the UNDP expert. Only 1.3% of candidates are self nominated. ¶7. (SBU) Criticisms of this year's elections have included: information about the legal changes were poorly distributed and not until early January; although the election period was lengthened from 90 to 105 days to allow for more public consultation on candidates, the elections were announced immediately before Tet, so the extra two weeks were lost to Vietnam's long holiday. Also, candidates appear to have had only limited access to the mass media to promote their campaigns, as stipulated under the new law. Many voters admit total lack of knowledge about who the candidates are and what they stand for. Some have pledged privately to vote only for the youngest candidates, in hope of stirring up change. Similarly, others resolved only to vote for non- CPV members. Many, perhaps most, expressed little optimism that the results of the elections would be in any way meaningful, and few Hanoi voters could describe exactly what People's Councils do. ¶8. (U) Another failed initiative in this year's elections was an anti-corruption move by the National Assembly Standing Committee, which required candidates publicly to declare their personal assets. The move was broadly declared on March 17, but then quietly scrapped. A Prime Minister's office spokesman claimed that the reason the move was dropped was that private businesspeople had threatened to drop out of the campaign if forced to reveal their assets. (Note: In the 2002 National Assembly elections, some constituencies posted these declarations publicly, while others made them available upon request at the local VFF office -- ref c. End note) ¶9. (SBU) Comment: Despite the media fanfare about the elections, the process remains very much under tight official control, with the GVN and CPV still reserving the ability to veto candidacies, including those self- or community-nominated candidates from outside the official structure. More women, ethnic minorities, and youths on the Councils may be perhaps a positive step, but given the clearly defined targets for percentages of each group to become candidates, these welcome goals were rather anti- democratic in nature, albeit more representational. The People's Councils elections are in the end more about encouraging a sense of public participation in local legislative processes than in stimulating genuine grass- roots democracy or true local empowerment. The public apathy that has so far manifested itself is perhaps the clearest comment on the failure of this gesture. BURGHARDT