Tajiks Worry Election Row Could Erode Civic Accord

The vehemence with which Tajik opposition parties are challenging the recent parliamentary election results has citizens worried about the possible collapse of civic accord in the country.

Four leading opposition parties are refusing to recognize the landslide victory of President Imomali Rahmonov's People's Democratic Party of Tajikistan. According to official tallies from the February 27 vote, the PDPT will control 49 of the 63 seats in the Tajik legislature. Meanwhile, two opposition parties gained representation in parliament, with the Communist Party winning three seats and the Islamic Renaissance Party (IRP) two. The remaining MPs are nominal independents, although many have ties to the ruling establishment.

At a March 1 news conference, Muhuddin Kabiri, an IRP leader, insisted that Rahmonov rigged the vote, noting numerous instances of ballot-stuffing. "Instead of transparent elections, we saw many transparent [electoral] violations," Kabiri said. The same day, Democratic Party leader Rahmatullo Valiyev said the vote was marred by "terrible and disgraceful violations." Observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe also described Election Day procedures as flawed. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive].

Opposition leaders have lodged appeals in Tajik courts and with the country's Central Election Commission to review the results, and rectify any infractions. At the same time, Kabiri emphasized that he does not expect the justice system to function fairly. "The party [IRP] does not believe that the country's judicial system is independent and hopes only for the political will of the country's leadership," Kabiri said.

Rahmonov, however, has given no indication of wanting to address the opposition's complaints. The president issued a decree seeking to convene the new parliament no later than March 17, regardless of whether the country's courts or the election commission issued ruling on the opposition appeals by that time. On March 2, a top PDPT official, Davlatali Davlatov, dismissed the allegations of vote-rigging. "We won the elections because we worked actively and acted within the law," he said.

The opposition raised stakes with an announcement that IRP and Communist Party MPs would boycott the legislature if the government and the courts did not respond to the election complaints. At the same time, Rahmatullo Zoirov, leader of the Social-Democratic Party, suggested at a March 1 news conference that the Rahmonov administration's reluctance to seek a political compromise could prompt public protests. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

In a country like Tajikistan, where approximately 50,000 people died during the 1992-97 civil war, talk of boycotts and protests are taken very seriously by politicians and the public alike. Civic accord has remained tenuous since the peace accord took hold in 1997, and Tajiks are well aware that a street protest could quickly spark renewed confrontation.

A growing number of Tajiks are ready to demonstrate against "the existing regime and the illegal exercise of power," Zoirov claimed. Only fear of a resumption of civil war is keeping popular passions concerning ballot-rigging in check, he added.

Kabiri, during his news conference, indicated that if Rahmonov did not consider the election complaints, the opposition could interpret such inaction as a renunciation on the 1997 peace deal, in which the president committed himself to sharing power with his wartime enemies. "The elections went against moral norms and the spirit of the general agreement of peace signed in 1997. They also ran counter to the agreement on national accord, signed by most of the political parties," Kabiri said.

Political analysts in Dushanbe say popular frustration is running high, fueled by Tajikistan's poor socio-economic conditions and widespread corruption. At the same time, the overwhelming majority of the population is anxious to avoid another bout of upheaval. Both sides now appear to be taking time to ponder their next step, knowing that a misstep could lead to a resumption of a conflict that virtually no one wants.