The final report of the international observers, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions of the presidential elections in Belarus will be published early next week. This was reported in the press service of the Bureau.
In custody, released on December 20 in Minsk, observers noted that elections Belarus still do not meet OSCE standards.
"The presidential election showed that Belarus still has a considerable way to get up to their OSCE commitments, although were made Some specific improvements "- the document says.
Observers noted that the election day "was marred by detentions of most presidential candidates and hundreds of activists, journalists and representatives of civil society."
"While the vote on election day was generally positive assessment, the process deteriorated considerably during the count: according to observers, almost half of the votes (DOTS) was calculated poor or very poor. This has undermined the steps that were made in order to improve the elections, "- said the OSCE observers.
The head of a short-term OSCE observer mission and the OSCE PA delegation Tony Lloyd said that "These elections failed to give Belarus the new start, in which it is needed. "" The counting process was not transparent. The people of Belarus deserve better. In particular, I now expect that the government will be responsible for the arrests of presidential candidates, journalists and human rights, "- said Lloyd.
In turn, the head of the long-term observation mission ODIHR Geert Hinrich Arenc said: "I was hoping for once we can give a more positive assessment. Unfortunately, this is not possible in light of the deficiencies in the vote count and the hard authorities to respond to yesterday's demonstration. "
Ambassador Ahrens called on the Belarusian authorities to remain committed to OSCE commitments and did not stop democratic reforms necessary to bring the elections in accordance with international standards.
In this case, the OSCE observers noted that during the campaign, all the presidential candidates had the opportunity to freely communicate their messages to the electorate. They, in particular, could apply directly to the electorate during the two debates and free air time given to them without censorship, but on a limited basis.
Nevertheless, the current president and the other candidates were competing on unequal terms, observers stressed.