After a day of intensive consultations with opposition parties following the 26 October parliamentary elections, Georgian President Salome Zurabishvili held a briefing in which she said she would not recognize the official election results. She thanked all the voters who voted for Georgia’s European future: “There were lots of you, you won in these elections …
  • JeSuisUnHombre@lemm.eeEnglish
    62·
    9 days ago

    But she said “there were so many violations that it was impossible to detect them all”. She said: “We witnessed something very unusual: this was a total falsification, a total stealing of votes, using all the tricks that can be used to falsify elections, and on top of that – the use of modern technologies to whitewash the elections.

    She said it was unprecedented, adding: “We were witnesses and victims of a Russian special operation, a new type of hybrid warfare waged against our people.>

  • Maggoty@lemmy.worldEnglish
    22·
    8 days ago

    Okay for people as confused as I was an hour ago.

    She doesn’t caucus with either major party and is officially an independent. But she’s politically liberal. The pro Russia group is currently in control of the parliament and the pro EU group including her is calling bullshit on the elections.

    She doesn’t have a ton of power though. They shifted a bunch of power to the parliament right before she took office. I’m not clear on what power she does or does not have in regards to elections to remedy this.

  • Meldrik@lemmy.wtfEnglish
    8·
    8 days ago

    I don’t understand how a country, that is occupied by Russia, has a pro-Russian government!

  • S_H_K@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    214·
    9 days ago

    What internationalnwatchers she’s talking about? Who would.have won? Why the fuck Georgia?

    • 0x815@feddit.orgEnglish
      121·
      8 days ago

      The OSCE report (pdf) says:

      Election day was generally procedurally well-organized and administered in an orderly manner but marked by a tense environment and several incidents of physical altercations and widespread intimidation of voters, as well as citizen observers. Voter identification (VID) and vote-counting devices (VCDs) were mostly operational, but the majority of voters in observed polling stations had difficulties operating the VCDs. Further, vote secrecy was potentially compromised in 24 per cent of observations, due to the manner of ballot insertion into VCDs or inadequate polling station layout. IEOM observers frequently reported indications of pressure on voters and overcrowding, and procedural inconsistencies.

      In many cases, party representatives recorded the voting process and tracked voters, raising concerns about potential intimidation. While the presence of citizen and party observers contributed to transparency, many citizen observers appeared to act on behalf of contestants. During counting, procedural omissions included the improper handling of unused ballots, not announcing votes aloud and the IEOM noted inconsistencies in the determination of the validity of ballots. Tabulation was positively assessed, but the completeness and accuracy of results protocols was not consistently checked, with DECs citing that official results are finalized at the national level.

      And here is another report.

      Addition for the report by Transparency International Georgia

      The election day took place in the context of serious and substantial violations. At the end of the day, it became clear that the various problems identified during the monitoring of the election process during the day were part of a larger scheme, the purpose of which was to subvert the final result of the election […] unprecedented pressure was exerted on the representatives of the monitoring organizations. There were physical attacks, verbal abuse, intimidation, expulsion from the electoral precincts without reason. In most cases, it was impossible to observe the voting process. In some cases, it was even necessary to evacuate the observers […] there was a concentration of unauthorized persons in the polling stations and their surrounding areas, who were particularly aggressive towards both voters and observers. As always, this time too, in order to pressure and intimidate the voters, the ruling party used criminal groups […] neither the election administration nor the law enforcement bodies reacted to the gross facts of the violation of the law. There was a clear impression that the persons involved in rigging the elections had guarantees that no one would raise the question of their responsibility, even though they committed crimes […]