Advocacy in Cambodia: Increasing Democratic ... - Pact Cambodia

however. Publicly, government officials did not
support the proposed changes.
Participation in Monthly COPCEL Meetings
Facilitated by CDRI, regular COPCEL
monthly meetings were initiated to create a forum
for, and prevent conflict surrounding, the dialogue
between the main political parties, government
departments, election officials, and civil society
groups. On average, 35 people attended the
meetings, which were held for more than two and
half years. Participating ministries included
Defense, Interior, Education, Women’s Affairs,
and Information.
COPCEL meetings were not without tension,
but participants continued to attend (including the
NEC Chair who was grilled regularly every month),
indicating that participants felt that overall the
dialogue process was beneficial. The success of the
meetings is attributed to the absence of hidden
agendas, follow up one-on-one meetings, a nonjudgmental
context, and the maintaining of
accurate minutes which were then widely
distributed to government agencies and the four
governors and vice-governors of each province.
Participants eventually voted unanimously to
continue the process until the national election of
2003.
COPCEL meetings proved to be particularly
useful when dialogues became strained due to
concern about the role of the NGOCC. The
meetings provided a forum for preliminary
discussions on issues that were then followed up
on in outside meetings between EMOs and the
NEC.
The COPCEL meetings are reminiscent of the
consultation the Department of Fisheries had with
civil society groups and the tripartite meetings that
take place at the Ministry of Labor. Though the
dialogue process is not always smooth, the process
often results in various actors softening their
stances and coming to understand other points of
view. The main difference between COPCEL
meetings and Ministerial meetings is that at
COPCEL meetings, all participants are on an equal
footing and there is no agenda for change. In
contrast, Ministerial meetings are usually held
precisely because there is an agenda for change,
which creates pressure on both sides to achieve a
pre-set objective (for example, to come to a
consensus on the articles of a draft law).
During the events in Phnom Penh, NGO leaders
and the election coalitions marched in front of the
National Assembly and Senate, where they met
with Parliamentarians.
When the march from the Independence
Monument to the National Assembly was
proposed, two of the coalition groups were
hesitant to participate even though legal
authorization for the event had been obtained. The
march took place anyway, and a number of NGOs
participated, but it was not as successful as had
been anticipated or hoped for. A lesson learned in
this process was the importance of understanding
the different natures of agencies involved in a
campaign and identifying fears, pressures, and
constraints that may lead to discord.
Although a march can be an effective way of
gaining public attention, some feel that marches
are closely associated with opposition parties
(which have marched extensively in the past), and
consequently are reluctant to participate out of
fear of being affiliated with opposition parties.
Lobbying with Donors
EMOs maintained regular communication
with donors, a strategy that proved to be effective
in getting results, but also backfired in one
situation. Any time a request or inquiry was
submitted to the NEC by EMOs and no response
was forthcoming, EMOs learned that an email
circulated to donors was likely to produce the
desired response in record time. This occurred in
the case of using blackboards for vote counting,
described previously.
Maintaining regular contact with donors was
an effective strategy because donors were, for the
most part, supporting both the EMOs and the
NEC. Another avenue for lobbying was by meeting
with the EU, UNDP representatives, and
embassies that had direct contact with the Prime
Minister and that were in a position to raise issues
for NGOs.
Close relations with donors had its
disadvantages as well however. One obstacle that
EMOs encountered was the fact that some donors
originate from countries with proportional
representation systems. Those donors were not
necessarily in favor of efforts to change to a direct
electoral system.
One significant error related to fostering close
Case Studies
March on the National Assembly
Another strategy employed during
CCEL lobbying was the organization of three
days of public gatherings in Phnom Penh and
four provinces (Kompong Thom, Takeo,
Kandal, and Kompong Cham) in July 2000.
Although a march can be an effective way of gaining public attention,
some feel that marches are too closely associated with opposition
parties which have marched extensively in the past.
70