Mr KING (9:14 PM) —Successive Australian governments have been at the forefront of international efforts to promote democracy and respect for human rights within the Kingdom of Cambodia. Cambodia is a close neighbour to Australia, and its people have suffered much over many decades—most infamously during the years of Pol Pot's brutal rule. Many Australians will therefore have taken an interest in the recent national elections held on 27 July this year, the third such elections since the Paris Accord of 1991. I was pleased to have the opportunity to be a part of an international observers mission organised by the International Republican Institute, the IRI, for the final week of the election campaign and for polling day itself. Our delegation was ably led by the former New Jersey Governor and former US Environment Protection Agency head, Christine Todd Whitman. The mission included over 60 observers from countries across the globe, including the United States, Canada, China, Indonesia, Mongolia, the UK and, of course, Australia.

While the delegation was in the country for only a relatively short time, the IRI has been monitoring the election process from the commencement of voter registration in January of this year. I pay tribute to the staff and supporters of the IRI for the comprehensive preparations that were put in place to allow our mission to make a meaningful assessment of the election. Our mission's preliminary report can be found on the web at www.iri.org. In summary we found, and I quote from our report:

It was clear to me that the people of Cambodia have embraced the democratic process. A voter turnout of around 80 per cent was achieved, and the campaigns of the various political parties were regarded with considerable interest and enthusiasm among the populace.

There were many positive features to this election, which led us to find that improvements had occurred since the last national election five years ago. Perhaps most importantly—I know from my own visits to polling places in Kompong Cham province, the most populous province, and from the reports of other observers—election day was conducted in a relatively peaceful and orderly manner. I visited rice paddies, rubber plantations and even went up the Mekong River to fishing villages and found that, generally speaking, the election was conducted in an orderly fashion. Administration has improved, and the Cambodian National Election Committee operated with greater transparency than it had in the past.

Our report also identified the lively 30-day election campaign period that preceded polling day. There was extensive voter contact by the parties and their candidates, and interparty debates were popular in the electorate. Nonetheless, there were disturbing aspects to the election and the period that preceded it. Many human rights organisations have focused on the intimidation of opposition parties and figures over the year prior to the campaign. The Cambodian Centre for Human Rights identified over 400 cases of politically motivated crimes over the last 12 months, including the murders of 11 political activists. And problems remain in relation to media access for non-government parties. While allocated broadcast times for all parties on state-run media outlets were a positive step, the bias of reporting and the pro-government stance taken by private television stations were not conducive to fair political analysis.

On polling day, I and other observers reported that, at many polling stations, there was evidence that village chiefs were intimidating voters despite NEC directives against such practices. There were also reports of gift-giving by all political parties. It was clear to me that significant problems were caused by failures, deliberate or otherwise, in the registration process for voters. Many citizens who claimed to have registered found that their names were not on electoral rolls and they were disenfranchised as a result. It is disappointing to note claims that registration problems seemed to be concentrated in areas where opposition parties expected strong results. For example, in Kompong Cham, where I was, 90 workers from Phnom Penh were excluded from the polls at the local village where they returned to vote, even though they had registered in January. Our report identifies other matters of concern that made this election less fair.

In summary, my view is that the national assembly elections could be described as free but not fair—if it is possible to distinguish the two concepts. The fact that those who observed the elections since 1993 found that there were improvements is a cause for optimism, and the strength of democratic sentiment among Cambodians—which was clearly evident—is as well. It is my sincere hope that the government, with an increased majority, will work to correct the irregularities that occurred this year and will work towards a fairer political climate. Only then can the international community regard the transition to democracy in Cambodia as having been a categorical success. In that regard, the support of Australian financing and facilitating the strength of civil institutions is clearly important, and I encourage the Minister for Foreign Affairs to maintain the strong support we have given through our aid program. I thank the IRI for giving me the opportunity to be a part of its important work, and I affirm the value of an election observer program which encourages and promotes the democratic standards that we in Australia enjoy.