Excerpt: “Recent efforts by state authorities to improve electoral integrity were notable, and the election was efficiently administered, however, the first round of the 2025 repeat presidential election was marked by insufficient oversight of key aspects of the campaign and concerns over the widespread use of inauthentic behaviour by candidates online. Fundamental freedoms of association and assembly were respected, and voters had a choice among political alternatives. While the legal framework provides an adequate basis for conducting democratic elections, recent changes did not sufficiently address the issues currently impacting public trust. The transparency in the work and decision-making of the election administration was limited. The use of eligibility requirements based on court rulings, rather than on clear legal provisions, detracted from the inclusivity of the candidate registration process. The authorities took a fragmented approach to overseeing the online space, which, together with a lack of information on the handling of reported violations, discouraged civic engagement and led to selfcensorship. While the media landscape is diverse and the public broadcaster provided balanced coverage, many outlets reflected political affiliations, which limited voters’ access to impartial information. Election day was orderly and efficiently administered, with some shortcomings noted, including some instances of compromised vote secrecy, campaign materials near polling stations, and the presence of unauthorized individuals inside polling stations.”
report
(20 pages)
Share