A/HRC/16/59 counted at the polling stations, opposition candidates and a local Myanmar organization reported strong support in the constituencies those candidates contested with projections that they might win over 40 per cent of the elected seats at the national level. However, some candidates reported that the vote count was suspended and resumed later without observers, resulting in a change of outcome with the USDP candidate suddenly winning. Some reported that when the USDP candidate was losing, large numbers of advance votes arrived at the last minute to change the balance. 15. Despite what should have been a relatively tiny margin of votes, these advance voting ballots are estimated to have represented 10 per cent of the vote nationwide. On 18 October 2010, Thein Soe, the Chairman of the Union Election Commission, referring to advance votes, had explained that: “The categories include those under hospitalization, under detention, military personnel on duty, training and those abroad. These numbers are small.” Almost all advance votes appear to have gone to USDP candidates. The use of advance votes further undermined the credibility of an election process that was seriously flawed from the start. The election laws limited freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association. Key stakeholders were excluded from the process, while significant barriers to participation hampered candidates and parties from contesting fairly. 16. International responses include disappointment by Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon; in a statement issued by his spokesperson, it was noted that voting was held “in conditions that were insufficiently inclusive, participatory and transparent”.1 The European Union and the United States of America said that the elections had not been free, fair or inclusive while others, such as South Africa and the Philippines, emphasized the non-inclusive nature of the exercise. Viet Nam, which held the rotating chair of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 2010, welcomed the general election and encouraged Myanmar to further promote the national reconciliation and democratization process for the goal of stability and development of the nation, expecting Myanmar to closely work together with ASEAN and the United Nations in that process. Thailand hailed the elections as “an important step in the democratization process and national reconciliation in Myanmar which the Royal Thai Government has long supported,” while urging the new Government “to ensure the inclusion of all stakeholders in Myanmar society, including opposition and ethnic minorities, to work together constructively for the long-term national reconciliation, stability, peace and prosperity of their country”.2 17. The procedure for filing a complaint about the electoral process as elaborated in the Complaints Procedure for Election Fraud is highly problematic and in fact unprecedented. A non-refundable fee of one million kyat (about $1,200) is required to formally file a complaint. Given that the average annual salary in Myanmar is $459, this fee is prohibitively expensive and appears intended to prevent complaints. In contrast, the maximum penalty for an election violation such as “violence, threat, undue influence, cheating, taking or giving of bribes to prevent a person from exercising the right of voting and the right to stand for election” is 100,000 kyat ($120) (as well as the possibility of one year of imprisonment). The disproportion between the complaint-filing fee and the penalty for violations is incompatible with a fair electoral process. 18. In addition to the financial burden of filing a complaint, the Government appears to have issued an implicit threat of further fines and imprisonment for complainants who pursue justice. The New Light of Myanmar reported on a letter sent by the Union Election Commission to political parties which stated that some parties had made allegations through foreign radio stations and print media “on the grounds that their candidates were 1 2 Available from www.un.org/apps/sg/sgstats.asp?nid=4911. Available from http://thailand.prd.go.th/view_inside.php?id=5346. 5