MEMORANDUM

July 16, 1995

To: Sharon Isralow, USAID, LAC/RSD/DHR, ) From: David Carroll, LACP/Carter center~~\ Subj.: Reports on USAID's grant to Carter Center

(to Support Democracy in the Americas)

As discussed in our conversation of July 12, this memo is to inform you and other appropriate officials at USAID that the attached Semi-Annual Report (SAR) for the period from August 2, 1994 to March 31, 1995, also contains the information and reporting required for the first three Quarterly Program Performance Reports of the grant, covering the period August 1994 through May 1995 (and coinciding with the periods of the attached quarterly financial reports). And, as agreed in our July 12 conversation, this SAR therefore meets the reporting requirements for the first three Quarterly Reports.

I enclose the SAR, plus an additional copy re-titled to correspond to the three Quarterly Program Performance Reports.

As per our conversation to this effect, I also hereby request that you please distribute copies of the attacheJQuarterly Reports to the USAID Office of Procurement/LA Branch/Division B, and also that you please forward two copies to USAID's office of CDIE/DI, in compliance with the reporting submissions required in the grant agreement. Thank you for your assistance.

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2, 1994 - March 31, 1995

IA. BACKGROUND DATA

Project Title: Project Number: Date of Authorization: Date of Obligation: PACD: Implementing Agencies: Major Contractors:

AID Project Manager: Status of CPs/Covenants:

original: original: original:

amendment: amendment: amendment:

Date of Last Evaluation: Next Evaluation: Planned Number of Non-Federal Audits during Fiscal Years: The Number of such Audits Contracted for/Completed: Date of Last Audit: Next Audit:

lB. FINANCIAL DATA

Amount Authorized: DAIESP Grant: Amount Obligated: DAIESP Grant: Amount Committed: Period:

Cumulative:

original $ original $

$

Accrued Expenditures: Period - Projected: $ $ $

Counterpart Contribution:

% LOP Elapsed: % of Total Auth. Oblig,: % of Total Oblig. Exp,: % of Total Auth. Exp.:

Period - Actual: Cumulative: Period - Next:

Planned: Actual:

lEST AVAILA8l.E COPr 1

$ $

$ $

amended to $ amended to $

'.2n .,. -1' I I.~' 1\ .

z/ L~/ 11'

"--, 5/31 / ~ S'

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2, 1994 - March 31, 1995

IIA. RELATIONSHIP TO MISSION STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES

Specific Linkage to Strategic Objectives:

This project supports the Council of Freely Elected Heads of Goverrunent, an informal group of twenty-five current and former heads of state in the Americas chaired by former President Jimmy Carter and based at The Carter Center's Latin American and Caribbean Program (LACP).

Dr. Robert Pastor, Professor of Political Science at Emory University, is the LACP Director and Fellow, and also serves as the Council's Executive Secretary. The other members of the LACP/Council staff are: Dr. David Carroll, the LACP Associate Director; Dr. Jennifer McCoy, Professor of Political Science at Georgia State University, and LACP Senior Research Associate; and Ms. Harriette Martin, the LACP Administrative Assistant.

The LACP/Council works to promote USAID's strategic objectives of democratization and democratic consolidation in the Americas. President Carter and other Council members mediate disputes among polarized parties in countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, and provide an independent, third-party presence which helps to build confidence in the democratic process in new and emerging democracies in the region.

Percent of LOP Funds Relating to Strategic Objectives: 100%

lIB. PROJECT PURPOSE

The purpose of the LACP/Council is to support and promote the emergence and consolidation of democracy in the Americas. To this end, the LACP/Council provides high-level mediation of electoral and political disputes, and implements various other projects regarding democratic consolidation and economic development.

III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The LACP/Council's work is divided into two main areas: (I) election monitoring and assessment, including the mediation of electoral "rules of the game" in transitional democracies, and (2) efforts to support democratic consolidation, conflict resolution, and economic cooperation and development in the Americas.

2

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2. 1994 - March 31. 1995

Background. Under President Carter's leadership, the LACP/Council has played an important role in facilitating democratic transitions in Latin America and the Caribbean. Since 1989, the LACP/Council has organized or otherwise participated in thirteen election-monitoring projects in nine different countries in the Americas (Haiti 1987, 1990 and 1995, Panama 1989 and 1994, Dominican Republic 1990, Nicaragua 1989-1990, Guyana 1990-1992, Suriname, 1991, the United States 1992, Mexico 1992 and 1994, and Paraguay 1993). In addition to election-day observation, LACP/Council election monitoring projects typically involve a range of other activities, including the monitoring and assessment of the pre-electoral process, mediation of the electoral "ruIes of the game," post-election assistance to ensure a smooth political transition, and other forms of high-level political mediation.

Over the past several years, as the number of Latin American and Caribbean countries which have undergone successful transitional elections has grown, President Carter and the LACP/Council have developed a variety of "second generation" democratization projects which aim to promote the long-term consolidation of democracy and development in the hemisphere. The policy outreach projects in this area encompass a variety of initiatives, including: political mediation and consensus-building among polarized parties in emerging democracies; advice and technical assistance in implementing electoral reforms; and research and policy recommendations to promote hemispheric economic cooperation and development.

Overview of current LACP/Council Project Initiatives. During the period covered by this report (August 2,1994 - March 31,1995) the LACP/Council staff at the Carter Center have worked to provide general support to the Council, to implement new and ongoing LACP/Council initiatives, and to explore opportunities for potential Council involvement in additional democratization projects.

The LACP/Council's major initiatives during the report period include projects in: Nicaragua, Mexico, Haiti, Panama, and Guyana. A detailed description of project status in each of these follows in Part IV.

(Note: this report covers the 9-month period between August 1994 and March 31, 1995, because the grant start date is August 2, 1994, while USAID's reporting period is from October 1, 1994 through March 31, 1995),

3

IV. PROJECT STATUS

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2. 1994 - March 31, 1995

(A) Planned EOPS. and (B) Major Outputs (Progress to Date)

I. Nicaragua. (A) Planned EOPS: Significant progress in resolving property disputes in Nicaragua, through field visits and assessments by LACP/Council staff and consultants, and high-level Council mediation.

Background. The LACP/Council's involvement in Nicaragua dates back to the historic 1989-1990 electoral process, and the April 1990 election victory of Violetta Chamorro and the UNO coalition over the Sandinista's FSLN. Over a 9-month period in 1989-1990, the LACP/Council sent a series of high-level delegations to Nicaragua to monitor the process, mediate agreements on key electoral disputes, observe election day balloting, and witness the inauguration of President Violetta Chamorro. Since the 1990 election, the LACP/Council has continued efforts to assist in the consolidation of democracy in Nicaragua. In the Spring of 1991, President Carter, Dr. Pastor, and Dr. McCoy led a series of trips to Nicaragua to help mediate a social pact acceptable to all sides which allowed inflation to be brought under control and the costs of adjustment to be spread more evenly. In Spring 1993, President Carter, Dr. Pastor, and Dr. Carroll met with representatives of the Chamorro government, and later with Sandinista leader former President Daniel Ortega, regarding a number of issues in Nicaragua. In response to separate requests from both the Chamorro government and the Sandinista opposition, President Carter was able to persuade the Clinton Administration and key members of Congress to support a release of the $50 million in U.S. aid to Nicaragua which had been frozen as a result of efforts by some in the Congress.

(B) Progress to Date: Resolution of Property Disputes. In June 1994, the LACP/Council began implementing a new initiative in Nicaragua centered on the mediation of property disputes, as a means of breaking the lingering political stalemate in Nicaragua, and paving the way for economic growth and democratic consolidation. The project was launched in June 1994, when President Carter was invited to participate in a conference in Managua on "Reflections on Democratic Transitions" sponsored by the Nicaraguan National Assembly, the Foundation for Civil Society, the Institute for Central American Studies, and others.

While in Nicaragua, President Carter met with a range of political and other leaders, and was able to assist the various groups in reaching a consensus on an integrated package of steps that could expedite the resolution of some of the

4

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2, 1994 - March 31, 1995

property disputes. One of the most important elements in the package was an agreement that part of the proceeds from the proposed sale of shares of the state­owned telephone company, TELCOR, would be used to increase the value of bonds issued to compensate former land owners.

In response to the problem of the expected overburdening of the judicial system with some 5000 land claims cases which were to be submitted to the courts, President Carter offered the Carter Center's assistance in organizing a team of experts in Latin American land tenure issues to work with the Supreme Court and the Attorney General to suggest procedures for expediting the resolution of such land claims.

In early August 1994, at the invitation of the Nicaraguan Supreme Court, a small joint team from the Carter Center and the American Bar Association (ABA), which included property experts from the Land Tenure Center in Wisconsin, travelled to Nicaragua to develop recommendations for the establishment of new courts devoted to land claims. The team recommended that the Nicaraguan Supreme Court designate two courts in Managua to handle property issues, to be followed by three additional courts in two other areas of the country, with funding for the courts to be provided by the UNDP. The team also began working with the UNDP to develop a broader plan of action to encompass the entire range of land tenure and property issues in Nicaragua.

In collaboration with the UNDP, the LACP followed-up the August mission by sending a team of property law and mediation experts to Nicaragua in November and December, 1994. The team's terms ofreference called for an examination of legislative proposals that could provide for the resolution of a large number of the smallholder's property cases, as well as an assessment of the potential for utilizing alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, such as mediation, to facilitate the resolution of some of the property disputes.

The team sensed a growing optimism that a consensus legislative solution could be possible within the National Assembly for a portion of the property disputes. There was both a recognition of the need to make faster progress on property, especially given the political climate in the U.S., and a hardening of positions by some groups of former owners regarding the return of property or compensation. After the trip, the LACP issued a detailed report in April 1995 with a number of specific recommendations (see "Nicaraguan Property Disputes" attached as appendix). In particular, the report calls for the rapid approval of consensus

5

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2. 1994 - March 31. 1995

legislation to provide security to the majority of smallholders, the establishment of additional courts, the creation of an Ombudsman's office to facilitate the ongoing work of the administrative review agencies working on property claims, and the creation of an alternative dispute resolution system with trained mediators as a means of removing hundreds of cases from the litigation process.

The report has been distributed widely in Nicaragua and to interested parties in the U.S. Based in part on the analysis and recommendations in this report, key leaders from Nicaragua have agreed to attend a 2-day conference chaired by President Carter on July 4-5 to discuss property issues and to try to forge a negotiated consensus approach to the remaining problems.

2. Mexico. (A) Planned EOPS: Council analysis and assessment of the August 1994 Mexican electoral process, through long-term Council project to assess electoral reforms in Mexico, Council participation in an international observer delegation which monitored the August 1994 elections, and continued assessment in the post-election environment.

Background. Over the last several years, the LACP/Council has maintained a long-term project on democratization in Mexico. In September 1993 and again in June 1994, Council delegations travelled to Mexico to analyze Mexican efforts at electoral reform, focusing in particular on the questions of the structure of the Federal Electoral Institute (or, IFE) and the voter registry. The June 1994 delegation issued a report (see "Elections in Mexico: Third Report," attached as an appendix) which found that as a result of the 1994 reforms, the main political parties agreed that the basic rules of the game for a free and fair election were in place, but that the critical question was whether the political will existed on the part of the government and PRI to actually implement and enforce those rules. The report also expressed the LACP/Council's concern that an uneven playing field would limit the ability of all political parties to effectively compete. Especially important in this regard, the report pointed to the continued bias in media coverage, the high cost of advertising, campaign spending limits beyond the reach of any party except the PRI, and the great disparities in financial resources.

(8) Progress to Date: The August 21. 1994 Mexican Elections. In late June, the governing PRI party (Partido Revolucionario Institucional) and the IFE declared their intention to welcome foreign "visitors," including the LACP/Council, to be present during the election to witness the process. Because this decision by Mexico to invite visitors lobservers was taken so late in the process, the LACP/Council was unable to

6

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2. 1994 - March 31. 1995

develop a comprehensive involvement spanning the entire electoral process, as it had done in other countries.

Nevertheless, in response to these invitations, the LACP/Council decided to send a IS-person LACP/Council team to join with a 80-person international observer delegation organized by the National Democratic Institute (NDI), and the International Republican Institute (lRI), to monitor the elections. The team included Council members former Guatemalan President Vinicio Cerezo, former Costa Rican President Rodrigo Carazo, and former Canadian Prime Minister Joe Clark. Former Speaker of the House Jim Wright served as President Carter's personal representative.

The delegation found election day proceedings to be generally peaceful and orderly, and observed an unprecedented voter tum-out of 77% of registered voters. While the observer team found that there were numerous procedural irregularities and some evidence of voter intimidation, they did not detect any pattern of procedural irregularities that would have affected the outcome of the presidential race. Nevertheless, in its departure statement, the delegation expressed deep concern about the pre-election campaign conditions, especially the bias in media coverage favoring the PRI, the disparities in campaign resources, high campaign spending limits that only the PRI could meet, and the reported misuse of state resources for partisan purposes. These findings, and a more complete analysis are detailed in the LACP/Council's final report on the elections (see "The August 21, 1994 Mexican National Elections: Fourth Report," January 1995).

The LACP/Council is continuing to monitor develops in Mexican in the period following the August 1994 elections. In February 1995, Dr. Pastor returned to Mexico to discuss the LACP/Council election report's recommendations and other issues with the new Mexican president, Ernesto Zedillo, and with leaders of the PAN and PRD. And, in May 1995, Dr. Pastor met with PRD Senator Porfirio Munoz Ledo in Washington to continue the LACP/Council's dialogue with leading Mexicans.

7

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2, 1994 - March 31. 1995

3. Haiti. (A) Planned EOPS: Progress toward democratization and democratic consolidation, through high-level mediation of political disputes, analysis and assessment of electoral preparations for parliamentary and presidential elections in 1995.

Background. President Carter and the LACP/Council have worked to support Haiti's difficult transition to democracy since 1987. The Council assisted in Haiti's 1990 electoral process and played a decisive role in ensuring the success of the December 1990 elections. After President Aristide was overthrown in September 1991, President Carter and the Council resolved to do everything possible to try to reverse the coup and restore President Aristide to power.

Throughout 1991-1994, President Carter and LACP/Council worked with the UN, the OAS, and the Clinton Administration to assist, where appropriate, in devising a solution to the Haitian crisis. While in exile, President Aristide travelled to Atlanta on numerous occasions to consult with President Carter, and the LACP/Council staff continued to closely monitor developments in Haiti.

(D) Progress to Date: September 1994 Negotiation and Aftermath. The LACP/Council's efforts culminated in September 1994, when President Carter travelled to Haiti with General Colin Powell and Senator Sam Nunn, on behalf of the US government, to negotiate the departure of the military leadership and the return of President Aristide. The LACP's Dr. Robert Pastor served as the team's special advisor for the negotiations, and remained in Haiti two days after the main delegation left Haiti, in order to coordinate communication between the arriving U.S. forces and the Haitian military regarding the details of the agreement that had been reached.

In December 1994, following an exchange of letters between President Carter and President Aristide, a small LACP/Council team led by former Jamaican Prime Minister Michael Manley and Dr. Pastor visited Haiti to assess the economic and political climate, and to explore with President Aristide and other Haitian leaders whether the Council could be of further assistance in the democratic consolidation and economic development of the country. In their report on the mission (see "Assessment Mission to Haiti, Dec. 11-14, 1994," attached as an appendix), Prime Minister Manley and Dr. Pastor recommended that the CouncilILACP concentrate their efforts in several areas, including: (1) monitoring the electoral process and promoting a national dialogue, which together could serve as twin vehicles for building a democratic foundation in Haiti; and (2) facilitating Haiti's economic development, focusing in particular on issues of housing, education, and

8

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2, 1994 - March 31. 1995

reforestation, and collaborating with US universities also working in these areas.

In response to an invitation by President Aristide, President Jimmy Carter, Senator Sam Nunn and General Colin Powell, returned to Haiti in February 1995, along with Council member former Prime Minister George Price of Belize, the LACP's Dr. Pastor, the GDI's Amb. Streeb, and the LACP's Dr. Carroll. The main objectives of the trip were threefold: (1) to assess the plans for the upcoming parliamentary and municipal elections in June 1995; (2) to assess the overall security situation, including the prospects for the transition to the United Nations Mission force, which was to occur on March 31; and (3) to assess the state of economic development and the potential for future projects in which the Carter Center might assist.

After the mission, the LACP/Council issued a report which concluded with a mix of hope and caution for the future of Haiti (see "Mission to Haiti #2, Feb.23-26, 1995," attached as appendix). On the one hand, the team found that President Aristide was firmly in control and was publicly professing the importance of balancing justice and reconciliation in dealing with former adversaries. In addition, Haiti had begun to train a professional police force and had been offered $1.2 billion in support by international donors. On the other hand, the political opposition was very wary of President Aristide, and complained of his undue influence on the members of the Provisional Electoral Council (CEP). In addition, there are lingering questions about the CEP's ability to effectively and impartially administer the elections scheduled for June 25, 1995 (with a run-off on July 23, if necessary).

During and after the mission, President Carter and the LACP/Council made it clear that they were prepared to assist to mediate genuine concerns that parties have with the electoral process. The LACP/Council could only play this role, however, if it were invited by President Aristide and the CEP to do so, and if the OAS were to decide that it wanted additional observers from the Council to be part of a larger international observer mission.

9

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2, 1994 - March 31, 1995

4. Panama. (A) Planned EOPS: Progress toward political reconciliation in Panama, through Council participation in and support of high-level political party dialogue and summit meetings.

Background. The LACP/Council has been involved in Panama since the 1989 elections, which were the first elections that President Carter and the LACP/Council observed. Since 1989, the LACP/Council has continued to monitor developments in Panama, and to explore possible areas of Council assistance. In the Spring of 1994, President Carter and the Council were invited by the Electoral Tribunal of Panama, the Government of Panama, and most of the major Panamanian political leaders to organize a mission to observe the electoral process in Panama, including the May 8 election. Although there was widespread confidence in the new Electoral Tribunal, the LACP/Council felt that their presence would be important as a way to lend support to Panama's democratic institutions, to help reduce tensions if problems emerged or the elections were questioned, and to promote reconciliation and a smooth transition.

The LACP/Council's 25-person observer delegation was co-chaired by former President Carter, former President Rodrigo Carazo of Costa Rica, and former Prime Minister George Price of Belize, and included representatives of Council members President Rafael Caldera of Venezuela, former President Fernando Belaunde of Peru and former President Oscar Arias of Costa Rica. The delegation was unanimous in concluding that the election was one of the best the LACP/Council had ever witnessed.

(B) Progress to Date: Bambito III. After the May 1994 elections, President-elect Ernesto Perez Balladares informed the LACP/Council that he would form a government of reconciliation, and pledged that four of his nine cabinet posts would be filled with persons who were not members of his own party. In order to lend support to the process of political reconciliation in Panama, President Carter decided to accept an invitation from the UNDP-Panama, and the National and the Catholic Universities in Panama, to attend the third "Bambito Summit" meeting on National Unity and Human Development on December 4-6, 1994, which was the first Bambito Summit following the inauguration of President Perez Balladares.

The purpose of the Bambito conferences is to bring together leaders from Panama's political parties, government, business, labor, church, women's and indigenous organizations in an informal atmosphere to discuss national priorities and improve communication among civil society, political parties, and the government. In addition to President Carter and the LACP's Drs. Pastor and

10

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2, 1994 - March 31, 1995

McCoy, other prominent international partIcIpants included former President Belisario Betancur of Colombia, and Edmundo Jarquin of the Inter-American Development Bank (lOB).

The Bambito-III participants agreed on a mechanism under which the universities and the UNDO would serve as a technical secretariat to convene future meetings to discuss urgent national issues. A second achievement was the signing of a social pact among labor, business, and government, committing each to specific efforts in the areas of education, labor code review, productivity, and competitiveness. Perhaps the most intangible, but also most significant, achievement of the Bambito process was the development of improved communication among the participants and a more genuine spirit of compromise.

5. Guyana. (A) Planned EOPS: Agreement on the substance of long-term electoral reforms in Guyana, and on plans for implementation, through LACP/Council staff and consultant visits to analyze electoral laws and assist in development of reform recommendations and implementation plans.

Background. The LACP/Council first became involved in Guyana during the electoral process in 1990-1992. During that time, the LACP/Council and President Carter organized a series of pre-election missions, playing a critical role in mediating compromise agreements between President Hoyte and the opposition leaders. After several extended delays in the process, the Council fielded a 63-person delegation to observe the October 1992 elections, which were the first elections in Guyana since 1964 which all sides accepted as free and fair.

Since the 1992 Guyana elections, the LACP/Council has worked closely with other Carter Center staff to build a cross-program Guyana Task Force to assist Guyana's democratic consolidation and economic development. The main focus of the Task Force's work is the Center's Global Development Initiative, which aims to promote closer cooperation among donor countries, development organizations, and host countries in creating sound and sustainable economic development strategies. Following a series of meetings and preparatory trips to Guyana by Carter Center staff, President Carter travelled to Guyana in January 1994 with Guyana Task Force staff to participate in a critical World Bank Caribbean Consultative Group conference on development.

II

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2, 1994 - March 31. 1995

(B) Progress to Date: Electoral Reform, In 1994 and 1995, Dr. Carroll and the LACP have continued their efforts on a two-pronged post-election project on electoral reform, The project's principal aims have been to (1) develop a set of recommendations for long-term electoral reforms--administrative, legislative, and constitutional-­necessary for establishing a permanent independent Elections Commission with complete authority over all future elections in Guyana, and (2) assist the new Elections Commission to prepare for local and municipal elections. The local elections, which were held as scheduled in August 1994, took place in an orderly and peaceful fashion, and resulted in a three-way split of the key City Council race in the capitol, Georgetown, and ultimately the election of Hamilton Green as mayor.

In light of the specific interest that Guyanese political parties and the Elections Commission expressed about Barbados' system of national registration and identification, in which all citizens are entered into a national registration system at birth, the LACP organized a team of Caribbean election experts, led by Dennis Smith, the former Chief Electoral Officer of Barbados, to work with the new Guyanese Elections Commission to develop recommendations for instituting a similar system in Guyana. In June 1994, a 3-person Carter Center team, including Dr. Carroll, and Mr. Smith travelled to Guyana to meet with the Elections Commission to review a set of proposed electoral reforms drafted by Smith and the LACP at the Commission's request. (See the report "Election Commission Proposals for Electoral Reform in Guyana: Phase I," attached as an appendix). The LACP team urged that the reforms be enacted well in advance of the next general elections, due in 1997. The Commission members asked the LACP team to assist in the completion of a supplementary report outlining a strategic plan for implementation, including estimates of the necessary human and financial resources.

Also as part of the electoral reform project, the LACP/Council arranged for three Guyanese electoral officials to travel to Barbados for the September 6, 1994 general elections to observe first hand how the electoral registration system in that country operates, and to extract information about the system that might be adapted for use in Guyana's electoral reform. The team of Guyanese officials was led by Elections Commission Chairman Edward Hopkinson, and included staff members of the Commission and of the National Registration Center. After the visit, the team issued a report of their observations, including some specific recommendations for Guyana.

12

PROJECT STATUS REPORT

August 2. 1994 - March 31. 1995

In December 1994, after completing the supplementary electoral reform report

requested by the Elections Commission, Dr. Carroll and Mr. Smith travelled to

Guyana to meet with the Elections Commission, political party representatives, and

others. The Elections Commission members unanimously supported the LACP's

reform proposals, and agreed to submit the LACP' s electoral reform report as the

Commission's own recommendations to the Guyanese Govermnent, which they did

as one of their last official acts before their term ended December 31. The report

("Proposals for Electoral Reform in Guyana: Phase II") is in the attached

appendix.)

Following the LACP team's visit, President Carter met with President Jagan on

December 16, 1994 in Atlanta to discuss issues related to economic development

strategies, electoral reform, and race relations in Guyana. A number of the

Center's Guyana Task Force members also met with Jagan during his visit,

including the GDl's Amb. Gordon Streeb and Jason Calder, and the LACP's Drs.

Pastor and Carroll. On electoral reform questions, President Carter told President

Jagan that he hoped that the Carter Center team's report on electoral reform would

facilitate official consultations between the parties. President Jagan indicated that

he intended to contact former President Hoyte and others to do so. After returning

to Guyana, President Jagan met former President Hoyte on January 5, 1995 and

announced that a joint commission would be formed by the parties in Parliament

to review electoral reform. This inter-party commission is currently at work

debating electoral and other constitutional reform issues.

Finally, as part of the ongoing dialogue between the Carter Center and Guyanese

leaders, Hamilton Green, the new mayor of Georgetown and leader of the Good

and Green Guyana movement, visited the Center on March IS, 1995 and met

briefly with President Carter, and then with several members of the Center's

Guyana Task Force, including GDI Director Amb. Gordon Streeb, and the LACP's

Drs. Pastor and Carroll. Green briefed the Task Force on Georgetown politics,

issues of race relations, electoral reform, and relations among the major political

parties.

l3

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2, 1994 - March 31, 1995

CC) Other Accomplishments and Overall Status

Overall, President Carter and the LACP/Counci! have made important contributions to democratization, and democratic consolidation in each of the project countries.

A precise assessment of progress made toward End of Project Status (EOPS) in the various initiatives is somewhat difficult due to the nature of the problems/projects in which the LACP/Council becomes involved. It is extremely difficult to ascertain, for example, the extent to which a particular outcome is the result of the Council's efforts, and what the situation would have looked like in the absence of any Council involvement.

Similarly, in many cases it is difficult to forecast a specific EOPS, because the exact problem or crisis in which the LACP/Council may offer its assistance can not be anticipated beforehand.

CD) Problems and Delays

To a certain extent, all of the LACP's project initiatives transpire in a somewhat unpredictable fashion. However, there have not been any large unexpected problems or delays in any of the initiatives.

eE) Major Activities or Corrective Actions During the Next Six Months

Nicaragua. After the November-December 1994 LACP/Council mission to Nicaragua, the LACP and UNDP distributed a detailed report in April 1995, to political leaders in Nicaragua and to key interested parties in the U.S. As a follow-up to the LACP/Council report and recommendations, President Carter and former Prime Minister George Price of Belize chaired a conference in Montelimar, Nicaragua on July 4-5, co-sponsored by the Council and the UNDP. Participants included key members of President Violeta de Chamorro's cabinet, the president of the National Assembly, other key Assembly chairpersons, leaders of the major political parties, members of the Supreme Court, leaders of the organizations representing former property owners, current occupants, workers, and ex-combatants, as well as the ambassadors from several countries. The conference was successful in forging a broad, though not universal, consensus on a range of property disputes, including the following consensus points: that small beneficiaries of urban and agrarian reforms should be protected; that former owners should be compensated with more valuable bonds; and that recipients of larger properties should either pay for or return those properties.

14

PROJECT STATUS REPORT August 2, 1994 - March 31. 1995

Haiti. During and after the February 1995 mission to Haiti led by President Carter, Senator Sam Nunn, and Gen. Colin Powell, the LACP/Council made clear that the Council is prepared to assist Haitians, if invited by President Aristide and the CEP to do so, in mediating concerns of the political parties and others about the electoral process for the parliamentary and presidential elections.

In order to assess the electoral process during the local and parliamentary elections, and to explore possible future roles for the LACP/Council, the LACP's Dr. Pastor travelled to Haiti for the June 25 elections. Dr. Pastor found that most of the political parties continued to believe that the electoral playing field was not fair both before and after the June 25 election. On election day, Dr. Pastor observed a complicated and chaotic balloting process, and a seriously flawed counting process. As of this writing, 22 of the 26 political parties have called for the elections to be annulled, even before any official results have been released. Due to these problems and delays, the run-off elections scheduled for July 23, and the re-running of balloting in some polling sites (mainly in sites that never opened on June 25) have been postponed.

The LACP/Council intends to continue monitoring the electoral process for the remainder of the parliamentary and local elections, and also during the upcoming presidential elections, and where appropriate and feasible, to offer its assistance to mediate any outstanding electoral disputes.

Guyana. Currently, the LACP/Council is continuing to monitor political and electoral issues in Guyana, and is maintaining a small-scale project on electoral reform assistance. As a follow-up phase to the LACP's electoral reform report and recommendations, the LACP is collaborating on a joint project with the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), a Washington, D.C.-based organization specializing in technical elections support, to conduct a detailed "needs assessment and implementation plan" for the Guyanese Election Commission to establish an integrated and computerized civil/voter registration system. The LACPIIFES initiative will be centered on a 2-week consultancy visit by a team of electoral and computer experts at the end of July, leading to the completion of a "needs assessment" report by September.

Other Council Initiatives. Past experience has demonstrated that it is difficult to anticipate precisely where and how the LACP/Council will become involved. To be able to tum an unexpected opportunity into a successful mediation requires substantial preparation and regular monitoring of problems. In the next six months, the LACP/Council staff will continue to monitor developments in a number of countries, including Nicaragua, Haiti, Guyana, and others, in order to be able to respond, where appropriate, to requests for assistance.

15