Tajikistan held its parliamentary elections on March 2 under the authoritarian regime of Emomali Rahmon, who has been in power since 1992. Rahmon’s party claimed victory, yet the elections lacked genuine political competition and international oversight. The Chinese-led Shanghai Cooperation Organization falsely labeled the elections as democratic. Widespread repression of dissent and media along with significant election irregularities raise doubts about the legitimacy of the outcomes.
On March 2, Tajikistan, the least affluent nation in Central Asia adjacent to Afghanistan, conducted parliamentary elections under the long-standing regime of Emomali Rahmon, who has held power since 1992. The People’s Democratic Party of Tajikistan, led by Rahmon, announced it secured 49 out of 63 parliamentary seats. However, these elections were characterized by a notable absence of international oversight, as Western observers faced restrictions in monitoring the process.
The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, influenced by China and Russia, labeled the elections as “transparent, credible, and democratic,” a notion echoed by Beijing. Contrarily, such assertions contradict the prevailing circumstances in Tajikistan. The elections failed to present any legitimate political competition, as all participating parties aligned closely with Rahmon. Over three decades, Rahmon has systematically dismantled political opposition, cultivating a regime that stifles dissent while promoting his cult of personality.
According to Freedom House, Tajikistan ranks amongst the world’s most authoritarian regimes. The regime’s perpetuation appears ensured by Rahmon’s son, Rustam Emomali, chairing the upper parliamentary house, which signals a potential dynastic succession. The Norwegian Helsinki Committee further criticized the parliament as merely a “rubber-stamp body” lacking legislative authority.
Since banning the Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan in 2015, political opposition has been effectively eliminated. The Social Democratic Party, formed in 2002, has not secured parliamentary representation, and its leaders have faced persecution. Following the death of SDP leader Rakhmatillo Zoiirov, several political figures, including Shokirjon Khakimov, were arrested on charges of attempting to overthrow the government, with sentences reaching up to 28 years. Notably, Khakimov’s niece, Ruhshona Khakimova, was imprisoned for 18 years under undisclosed charges.
The election’s transparency was further compromised. For the first time since 2000, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) withdrew its monitoring mission, highlighting concerns over the lack of accreditation assurances for international observers. Additionally, there was an absence of citizen observation and civil society organizations capable of independently reviewing the electoral process.
Human rights expert Steve Swerdlow remarked that OSCE’s absence is unprecedented and indicates intensifying authoritarianism under Rahmon. Moreover, the Tajik government barred Radio Ozodi from covering the elections, further diminishing media independence, as it is regarded as the last remaining independent outlet in the country. Reporters Without Borders ranked Tajikistan 155th in its World Press Freedom Index of 2024.
Despite governmental restrictions, regional media outlets have reported several voting irregularities that might indicate electoral fraud. Anonymously cited individuals revealed coercion of sick voters for supporting the ruling party and witnessed a person attempting to vote on behalf of others.
In conclusion, the lack of independent media and election monitors has left Tajikistan’s electoral outcomes unverifiable, raising questions regarding the legitimacy of the elections. Rahmon’s continued repression of political opposition and media freedoms significantly obstructs the prospects for free and fair elections within the republic, casting doubt on the authenticity of the recent electoral process.
The parliamentary elections in Tajikistan were marked by significant deficiencies, including the absence of meaningful political competition and international oversight. These conditions, shaped by an authoritarian regime, hinder the prospects for democratic processes. The lack of independent verification further calls into question the integrity of the election results, emphasizing the challenges faced by opposition and media within the country.
Original Source: www.voanews.com
