Author: Michael Maley
The people of Timor-Leste, in a plebiscite dubbed (for diplomatic reasons) a ‘popular consultation’, voted in 1999 by an overwhelming margin for the restoration of their country’s independence after almost 24 years of occupation by Indonesia. Since then, they have gone to the polls ten more times: in 2001 to elect a Constituent Assembly (which subsequently adopted a constitution and became the nation’s first National Parliament); in 2002 to elect a president; in 2004–05 and 2009 to elect local representative bodies; and three times each in 2007 and 2012, to vote for a president in a first-round poll and a subsequent run-off, and to choose a new National Parliament.
Timorese involvement in the organization and conduct of the popular consultation was very limited. International staff of the UN Mission in East Timor, including UN volunteers, occupied all senior positions of responsibility, and local staff served only as language assistants and polling officials under close supervision. For most of the period between the popular consultation and the restoration of independence in May 2002, Timor-Leste was under UN transitional administration. In March 2001, the transitional administrator created by regulation an Independent Electoral Commission (IEC), which ultimately conducted the 2001 and 2002 elections. In that body, Timorese officials played a much more prominent role — including as members of the Board of Commissioners — and by the time it had run a second election, it was a relatively well- consolidated institution. However, in a move that can with the benefit of hindsight be questioned, the transitional administrator abolished the IEC when his mandate was about to expire and replaced it with an identically named but much smaller body that had only a limited advisory role.
Subsequent Timorese government decisions on the future shape of election administration were significantly shaped by article 65, no. 6 of the country’s constitution, which states that ‘Supervision of voters’ registration and electoral acts shall be incumbent upon an independent organ, the competences, composition, organization and functioning of which shall be established by law.’
Implicit in this notion of ‘supervision’ was that the country would adopt a mixed model of electoral management with two electoral bodies: one that organized and conducted elections, and one that supervised the process. The first of those bodies, the Technical Secretariat for Electoral Administration (Secretariado Técnico de Administração Eleitoral, STAE), was created by government decree in July 2003 as an organ of the Ministry of State Administration, replacing, but also incorporating the staff of, the advisory IEC left behind by the UN. Two separate supervisory bodies, each designated the National Elections Commission (Comissão Nacional De Eleições, CNE), have been created. The first was set up only for the purposes of the local representative elections of 2004–05, and was disbanded after fulfilling its mandate. The second, and permanent, CNE was appointed in early 2007.
While STAE and CNE are the primary EMBs, the Court of Appeal (pending the appointment of a Supreme Court of Justice) has a number of electoral roles to play, especially in relation to the registration of political parties, the receipt and validation of presidential nominations, and the final certification of election results.
The Legislative Framework
The primary document governing the operations of STAE and CNE is Law No. 5/2006 of 28 December 2006, entitled Electoral Administration Bodies (to which a number of amendments were made by Law No. 6/2011 of 22 June 2011). This formally established both organizations, and specifies their powers and functions in detail.
The law defines CNE as being independent from any bodies of central or local political power, and as enjoying financial, administrative and organizational autonomy. It defines STAE as ‘a service of indirect state administration (Administração Indirecta do Estado), under the aegis of and supervised by the government, with its own budget and enjoying technical and administrative autonomy’, but also states explicitly that ‘Decisions made and procedures undertaken by STAE relating to operations of voter registration, elections and referenda shall be supervised by CNE.’
STAE’s functions and methods of operation are further addressed in Decree Law No. 01/2007 of 18 January 2007, entitled the Organic Statute of the Technical Secretariat of Electoral Administration, which, among other things, makes STAE subject to the authority and oversight of the Minister of State Administration, and confers a wide range of powers on the minister. These include: defining STAE’s strategic and policy guidelines; approving its budget, management reports, accounts, financial plans, internal regulations and staffing; and appointing and dismissing members of STAE bodies.
Separate laws dealing specifically with the election of the president and the National Parliament also detailed further duties, powers and functions of the CNE and STAE.
Composition and Appointment
CNE consists of 15 commissioners:
- three appointed by the president of the republic;
- three elected by the National Parliament;
- three appointed by the government;
- one judicial magistrate, one public prosecution magistrate and one public defender, each elected by his or her peers;
- one nominee of the Catholic Church;
- one nominee of the remaining religious faiths; and
- one representative of women’s organizations.
Commissioners are appointed for a six-year term, which may only be renewed once. The director-general of STAE is entitled to participate in CNE meetings, though without voting rights.
Institutional Structures
CNE has a president chosen by the commissioners from within their own ranks, and has sub-commissions on political parties and candidacies, voter registration and the registration database, civic education, legal affairs and litigation, and public relations and liaison. The commission’s work is supported by a secretariat based in Dili, headed by a director-general, which includes key functional areas such as planning, administration, finance, information technology, communications, documentation and legal support. CNE also has field staff located in each of the 13 districts.
STAE is also headed by a director-general, and has around 120 staff, the majority of whom are located in district offices. Key functional areas of STAE cover training, electoral education, information technology, voter database management, finance and logistics. Additional STAE staff are recruited to serve at election time.
Powers and Functions
CNE’s legislated functions include:
- supervising the electoral process;
- ensuring the enforcement of related constitutional and legal provisions;
- approving regulations for which legal provision is made, as well as codes of conduct for candidates, observers, monitors and media professionals;
- promoting information about the electoral process through the media;
- ensuring equality of treatment for citizens in voter registration and electoral operations;
- ensuring equality of opportunities and freedom of campaign propaganda for the candidates during the electoral campaign;
- notifying the Office of the Public Prosecution about suspected electoral offences;
- preparing and submitting to the Court of Appeal provisional documents setting out national election results, so that the final results of the general elections can be validated and proclaimed; and
- verifying the STAE database of registered voters.
STAE’s legislated functions include:
- carrying out the actions needed to complete electoral processes, referendums and electoral register updates in a timely manner;
- proposing appropriate clarifying, educational and informative measures for citizen involvement in electoral processes, referendums and electoral registration;
- planning, carrying out and providing technical support for elections, referendums and electoral register updates, both nationally and locally, through cooperation with existing administrative structures;
- compiling and publishing statistics involving the electoral register, electoral processes and referendums;
- supporting and cooperating with CNE; and
- organizing and updating the electoral register, under CNE’s supervision, by proposing and carrying out technical procedures and organizing, maintaining and managing the central database of registered voters.
Neither CNE nor STAE is mandated to register political parties (which is a function of the Court of Appeal), set election dates (that is done by the president of the republic) or engage in boundary delimitation (all elections in Timor-Leste thus far have been held either on a nationwide basis or using pre-existing administrative boundaries).
There is a degree of overlap and ambiguity in the functions of CNE and STAE, which has made their ongoing relationship challenging in a number of ways. A lack of clarity in legal provisions relating to the development of regulations led to a significant disagreement in the run-up to the 2007 elections, which was only resolved when CNE sent regulations directly to the Official Gazette, insisting that they be published. There have, indeed, been times when the STAE and CNE have appeared to be working competitively rather than cooperatively. Most of these sorts of challenges have, however, been resolved over time through the adoption of mechanisms that, if not ideal, have at least proven to be workable.
Finances and Accountability
STAE and CNE are both funded from the state budget. For 2012, CNE received a budget allocation of USD 5,85 million, USD 3 million of which was to fund the political parties represented in the National Parliament. STAE was allocated USD 8 million to cover the costs of the presidential and parliamentary elections. Neither of these amounts included the normal administrative expenses for both institutions.
STAE and CNE have also benefited from programmes funded by donors and the UN, which they might otherwise have had to forgo or fund themselves. Generally speaking, both organizations have been relatively well resourced, and Timor-Leste has more electoral officers per capita than many comparable countries.
CNE, though independent, is required to be accountable by filing an annual report with the National Parliament. For its part, STAE has faced the difficulty, in performing its functions, of being accountable (in some sense) to both CNE and to a minister.
Professionalism of Electoral Officers
The core staff of both CNE and STAE are, in general, relatively experienced, professionally competent and politically neutral. Most of the senior staff of STAE were originally selected by the UN to work with the IEC in 2001–02. While so employed, they benefited from a substantial capacity-building programme jointly implemented by the IEC and the Australian Electoral Commission, based on the earliest version of what became the internationally recognized BRIDGE curriculum. Throughout its history, STAE has actively encouraged and prioritized staff development, not least through the fostering of contacts with other EMBs, including those of Australia, Portugal and Indonesia. STAE staff have also frequently taken part in election observation, workshops and network meetings outside Timor-Leste.
CNE, though a younger organization, has also given priority to staff development. It has benefited from the relative stability of its membership since 2007, and from the fact that a number of the commissioners served on the first CNE in 2004–05. CNE has also displayed a good degree of professional unity, which is no mean achievement in an organization designed to draw people from a range of different backgrounds.
Both bodies have benefited greatly from support from the UN, bilateral donors, and other EMBs in the region and in the wider Lusophone community.
Relations with the Media and Other Institutions
CNE and STAE have generally managed to maintain relatively transparent relationships with the media and with a range of other institutions. Except in relation to electoral offences and CNE’s promulgation of codes of conduct for the media, they are not explicitly empowered to engage in media regulation. Both organizations actively publish useful material, including on their websites. They also appear to have earned a relatively high degree of public trust, and there has been little significant public questioning of their neutrality or effectiveness. A nationwide opinion poll commissioned by the International Republican Institute and conducted in November/December 2008 found that 80 per cent of those surveyed judged STAE to be doing either a ‘good’ or ‘very good’ job.
The Future
The prospects of well-sustained election administration in Timor-Leste look promising. Successive governments have shown a willingness to invest in the development of the country’s EMBs, and the major growth in the state budget flowing from oil and gas revenues suggests that the required resources will be available for the foreseeable future. STAE and CNE have demonstrated sound judgement in the selection of workable technologies, and the STAE voter registration database, and voter registration more generally, have been perceived as credible and effective. STAE and CNE have also been greatly helped in their work by the fact that political elites and the broader population are mainly respectful and supportive of proper electoral processes.
As is the case in most countries, it is inevitable that a rapidly changing electoral environment worldwide will pose challenges for Timor-Leste’s EMBs. An attempt to introduce out-of-country voting for the 2012 elections had to be abandoned on the grounds of administrative difficulty, but the demand for such a service is unlikely to go away. The skill base now present within the CNE and STAE should enable them to analyse such proposals effectively, and advise the National Parliament professionally.
The greatest challenge that CNE and STAE may have to face in the future is likely to flow from the peculiarity of the Mixed Model of administration, which seeks to reconcile a need for cooperation with the institutionalization of an intrinsically conflictual relationship. This was a real concern in 2007 and appears to have been ameliorated with the passage of time, but could at some point become a problem again.
