 I can't debase it once. Okay. Okay, go. A few seconds. Ramula. Welcome to our esteemed panelists this afternoon to our colleagues and friends from International Idea and to viewers in Fiji and across the Pacific. We welcome you to this webinar. We thank you for making the time, the commitment and the effort to join us as we log in to an important, an important conversation that we will be having today. And titled which traits makes a CSO and electoral activist. Because of the one hour gap, we will try to go straight into the program. The speakers will be allocated about 10 to 15 minutes to make a presentation, and then there'll be question and answers that will follow. We have received at least one advanced question that the speakers of course will be addressing in the course of their presentation, or when we conclude the their presentation this afternoon. But if you also have any other advanced or follow up question that you'd like to make during the presentation, please feel free to post into the question. The chat, the chat space, and we'll make sure that that's also addressed in the discussion time. Without much further ado, of course, ladies and gentlemen, again, thank you. Thank you for joining us. We will hand the platform to Mr. Rajan Morty, who is the Pacific coordinator for International Idea to give us a few of his opening remarks, and then I will introduce our esteemed speakers. Thank you, Mr. Morty over to you. So you'll need to unmute yourself for Rajan, if you don't mind. Hi, everyone. My name is Rajan Morty and I'm the program coordinator for PG International Idea. A very warm welcome to the third webinar of the democratic development in Melanesia webinar series 2021. We are very glad that you have joined us this afternoon. As mentioned today's topic is which trade may be CSO and electoral activation. Now, why did we choose this topic. The CSOs in the Melanesian region, Fiji in particular, over the years have shown keen interest on elections in their respective countries. Many of the CSOs are not specialized in political and electoral reforms, which is not unusual. This webinar has been designed with the thought that the CSOs can be encouraged by the presentation on how to become an effective electoral activist among other great work that is being done by the CSOs. Our speakers this afternoon are Titi Angrani, who is the board member of Perudam, which is association for election and democracy in Indonesia, having previously been its executive director for 10 years. Our second speaker is Louis Tito Grena, who is a former election commissioner in Philippines and has been active in civil society activities involving electoral reforms and election monitoring work. Tito Grena is the co-founder of the legal network for truthful elections in short lengthy. A CSO specializing on electoral reform and has recently observed a fellow beside in Palawan region in March. Now, why did we choose Indonesia and Philippines for our presentation. The reason why CSOs Indonesia and Philippines is because both the countries have CSOs who are specialized in political and electoral reforms. These two countries are closest to the Melanesian region and they have been active for decades and not years on electoral matters, and they will have useful experience to share with us today. Also, these two countries are the most democratic countries in the Southeast Asia. Of course, every country's context is different, but there are common threats that can be found. We hope that the presentation this afternoon will be helpful to the participants and to help in their approach towards electoral reforms in their respective countries. Thank you for joining us. Thank you very much, Mr Moti for your opening remarks this afternoon. I am of course delighted to be the moderator for this important webinar. We thank you for also for highlighting the purpose, the reasons why we are engaging in this conversation and why we've invited this esteemed speakers from Indonesia and Philippines respectively. And if it is on that note, I welcome our esteemed speakers, Mistiti and Mr. Louis Mistiti from Indonesia. I greet you, of course, I greet you and of course Mr. Louis I greet you also welcome to the Pacific. And we are delighted to have you as Rajan has briefly introduced them. Our next task now is to at least give a little bit more background on who the speakers are so that that we can have an appreciation of the expertise and the experience as they share with us the experience before we come in a time of question and answers. I also welcome our participants and friends who are connecting via the Facebook live platform welcome to the webinar this evening this afternoon that's organized by the International Institute for democracy and electoral assistance or international idea. Firstly, ladies and gentlemen, our first speaker is Mistiti Angaraini, who is from Indonesia. Salam Mistiti and again welcome. Mistiti is currently the advisory board member of the Association for Elections and Democracy or Perluden, an NGO that is engaged in the research and advocacy of elections and democracy in Indonesia. Mistiti previously was a member of the Election Supervisory Committee at the central level for the 1999 general elections, and in the 2006 to 2008. Mistiti worked with rehabilitation and reconstruction body for aka Nias or BRR aka Nias in managing legislative strengthening program at the tsunami affected areas throughout aka Nias. In 2017 mistiti was recognized as a democracy ambassador by international idea for her work in promoting free fair and democratic elections. Maybe at this juncture, ladies and gentlemen, we will hear from Mistiti before I then invite Mr. Louis as well as introducing before his session so mistiti welcome and I give you the platform. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Romulo, can you hear my voice. You are very loud. Thank you. I hope you all can see my PowerPoints on the screen. Good morning for friends in Jakarta and Indonesia and also good afternoon for all friends in Fiji. Thank you so much to international idea for inviting me to join this conversation. I believe that I can learn many things from Louis from believe in and also from all the friends in Fiji. I think I have 10 minutes I will start my presentation to share my own experiences and also my experience with Perludem Association for election and democracy in dealing with the electoral activism in Indonesia. My name is Titi Angraini. You can call me Titi. I worked with Perludem more or less for 12 years. And now I assign as the advisory board member. You can contact me through my email or my IG, Instagram or my Twitter, as I wrote on the screen. What is Perludem? You can check through our website, perludem.org. Perludem is an independent non-profit organization that carries out research at focusing, monitoring, education and training in the field of election and democracy. We are focusing specifically on election and democracy. For policy makers, organizers, it means election organizers, EMBs, election contestant, political parties and candidates, individual candidates or candidate representing political party and also voters. And who source of funds come from fundraising and other non-binding assistance. We receive assistance from international idea to do so many research and also from like IFAS, USET and so on and so on. When we work to promote election and democracy in Indonesia, Perludem and its personnel are guided by the agreed values of as follows. First, non-partisan, second, integrity and then fair, equality, participatory, freedom and independent. Those values guided us in doing our activities in dealing with election and democracy issues in Indonesia. So all of our programs and even our daily attitudes must represent all those values. This is what we call it Perludem's strategic values. Or in Bahasa Indonesia what we call it Nilay-Nilay Organisasi Perludem. And related to our topics this afternoon or this morning, what are main traits that I use in doing my activities as an electoral activist. First, as electoral activists, we are not political observers. Me and Perludem activists work and deliver its opinion based on data, what we call it as data activism, data electoral activism. Perludem activists do not comment on the electability of candidates, do not provide political support for and on behalf of any candidates. And what we didn't do, we didn't do partisan activism. For example, predict which coalition would succeed in the election, which candidate would win, which candidate had the greatest chance to win or to lose and so on. However, me and Perludem activists promote values based on democratic election principles. So what we promote is based on the democratic principles. For example, how to be a good voter, how to choose democratic leaders, educate the public to guard free and fair election, et cetera, that the main traits conducted by us in Perludem. Policy advocacy is one of the main activities of Perludem, because we are in Perludem believes that democratic elections start from a good legal framework. Therefore, Perludem is very active in conducting policy advocacy in order to realize a quality election law. We advocate to parliament, to government, to EMBs, election management bodies, because in Indonesia we are so unique, Mr. Romulo, in Indonesia we have three EMBs, election commission, election supervisory body and the Ethic Honorary Council to supervise the election organizers ethics. So we have three EMBs in Indonesia. And also we work with political parties, community leaders, academics, university actors and all relevant parties. But one principle that we committed is that the policy advocacy conducted proportionally and equally to all stakeholders. For example, in 2016, Perludem and the civil society coalition across issues and institutions prepared an alternate draft of the election law and presented it to the parliament and the government as material for the preparation of the election law which they were working on. So we have our own draft that we propose to government and parliament. The draft developed together among CSOs, not only election CSOs, but also human rights CSOs, woman CSOs, youth CSOs, indigenous people CSOs, so it's across issues and institutions. Perludem is also very active in packing legal efforts to constitutional court. In Indonesia, beside Supreme Court, we also have constitutional court. For example, to conduct judicial review of articles of laws that are deemed to be contrary to the constitution. So we are not only doing advocacy through policy makers, but also through the courts. We are very active in dealing with the courts. This is the coalition. When we submit the alternate draft on the election law, you can see that more than 40 CSOs gather together to develop the CSO draft and then this draft widely disseminated to all stakeholders dealing with election. You can see woman CSOs, woman research institute, and then this is university institution and then human rights institution and then these people with disabilities institution. So we try to invite as many as organization to join this coalition. And then the product of this coalition is an alternate draft of election law. This is one of the picture when I was invited to present the draft from civil society in front of the Commission 2 of National Parliament of the Republic of Indonesia. This is in the early of the pandemic era, early of 2020. This is the leaders of the Parliament, the Commission 2 of Indonesian Parliament and it's me, some of the members of the parliament joined the session through the online platform Zoom. So we are very often invited by parliament to deliver our insights and opinion on elections law. This is when we disagree with the result of the law. As you can see on the screen, I went me and Perluden, we went to constitutional court to appeal on the some articles on the law that violating the constitution. This is in the middle of 2020 during the pandemic, COVID-19 pandemic. This is before the pandemic. This is the first picture when we submit petition on the parliamentary threshold, because in Indonesia we think that the numbers of the parliamentary threshold, not what is it, promulgated or not developed based on the, what is it, realistic and reasonable arguments. The second picture when we went to constitutional court to defend the right to vote for the indigenous voters and for the voter with disabilities. So not only dealing with the policymakers, but we also went to the court to fight for the quality election law. We are also working closely with the election management bodies, me myself and also several friends, some friends in Perluden, several colleagues in Perluden, being part of the bridge trainers team. The bridge is the training training team that promoted by international idea, IFAS, UNDP and AEC. So me involved, me myself and some colleagues in Perluden also involved in doing training for election organizers. The second picture when I conducted training for election organizers in Lampung province, it is one of the province in Indonesia, and I regularly invited to give training for the election organizers and also both from election commission and also election supervisory body. We have a good cooperation to strengthen the capacity of election organizers in Indonesia. But we also face challenges for being an electoral activist. I think it's very common, faced by the electoral activists, accusation of being a comprador of foreign interest. Usually when we are getting close with the election, there were so many narratives on comprador of foreign interest. And the second one is suspicions about the source of the Perluden funds, particularly in the relation to foreign funding. And the third one, I think this is the biggest problem we face now in Indonesia, lack of funding and organization sustainability. So it puts us to be more creative to do the fundraising by selling books. We have our printed publication and we sell books. We conduct trainings for those who are interested to join the training. And then the allegation that we sided with one of the parties. But mostly, however, more often by group A we are accused of siding with group B and vice versa. For us that it means that we are still neutral when all the groups thinking that you are part of the other group. And the last one, activities during the pandemic are mostly done online. We face some of the Zoom hacking and also attacks on social media by the buzzer. For us, maybe in Perluden, it may be a minor annoyance, but for those who just want to become activists, it can be so scary. I think that's all for my presentation. I would like to hear comments, critics and respond from you all. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms Titi, for enlightening us about the work that you do and the important role of training community awareness and of course highlighting key issues within the electoral spaces in Indonesia. We note the context of the work that you do, the struggles, the challenges, and of course I'm sure the participants will probably like to ask further questions during our question and answer time. But of course, if there's anyone that has any question for me, Titi, feel free to put it up on the chat part of component of Zoom or via Facebook if you're watching via Facebook. But I'm sure there'll be a lot of important questions that will come out from the civil society groups as we hear the work that you're currently doing. But if you don't mind, we will go to Mr. Louis and then we'll get the questions together once he completes his presentation. On that note, ladies and gentlemen, again, we welcome those that have just joined us, particularly from the Republic of Palau and across the Pacific, as had been alluded to. This is a webinar that's targeting Melanesian countries, but for this purpose in particular, we are looking at Fiji, specifically Fiji, and therefore, but we also welcome participants that are joining across the oceans today. Now, ladies and gentlemen, I'll briefly introduce Mr. Louis Guia from the Philippines, Mr. Guia. He was a commissioner at the Commission on Elections, or the COMLEC, in the Philippines. President Benigo Aguino III appointed him to the position on 15th April 2013 with a term that was completed only last year in February. He was appointed an election commissioner. Mr. Guia has had more than 20 years of direct election experience in the Philippines. He started his election work as an executive assistant of the chairman of COMLEC in 1992 to 1995. He subsequently became an election law consultant in the poor body between 1996 and 1998. Mr. Guia was also a domestic and an international election consultant. He has assisted COMLEC in drawing up its strategic plan in 2011 by sharing international standards on election dispute resolution and political finance. He wrote articles on the Philippine automated election law of 2008, an election dispute resolution reform in 2010, and on political finance laws and campaign finance reform, 2007 and 2010, and on updating the legal framework of elections in 2008 and 2010, respectively, among other roles that he has engaged in. Again, Mr. Guia, we are delighted to have you come and speak to us and share with us your varied experience, particularly from the electoral management body side. So we now give you the platform. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. Do you hear me? Very clear. Thank you. Okay. All right. So, yes, I'm very glad and honored to be invited to participate in this webinar for Fiji and the other Melanesian country. It's very appropriate for me to take off from the presentation of my good friend, Titi Angriani from Indonesia, because whatever she told you, everything that she told you are things that are also applicable in my own experience in my country. Well, I was introduced as an election commissioner and as an election consultant, but prior to that I have been involved in a lot of civil society organization that deals with electoral reforms and election observation. So my experience brought me from being a volunteer in civil society endeavors to observe, monitor election and to propose election reform, and later on I joined the Election Commission of the Philippines and became an election regulator myself. So I know that whenever we talk about the experience of one country, I must be a bit more careful about understanding the context of the audience that I am trying to make a presentation for. So I'm sure that the context in the Philippines is might be different from that of Fiji and in other Melanesian country, but I hope that my sharing with you which will basically be my own experience with Resonate in terms of maybe providing some lessons or points that can be adopted in your country. Now, let me start by talking about election observation and monitoring. Well, from our context election observation monitoring consists of undertakings by non-partisan independent groups. Well, by non-partisan, I mean groups that do not support any of the contending political parties nor the position that they're taking electorally in an election campaign. In other words, non-partisan means not being connected to any of the contending groups in election, but also non-partisan in the sense that you are not perceived to be identified with either or with those contesting the elections. Now, what is the objective of election observation monitoring? Of course, that is one. One is to reduce incentives for fraud. Because when politicians and election management body knows that independent groups are looking at the process, then incentives and inclination to commit fraud is lessened. Now, it is also a way to assess the conduct of election based on accepted standards. And because there is an independent assessment of the elections by civil society group, then probably reforms in the electoral process can be had. So that is how we see election monitoring and election observation. Now, in relating the Philippine experience, I think it's important for me to be sharing with you the context, historical context of how CSOs participation in election have developed. Now, well, we have had our authoritarian, in our history, we have had experienced authoritarian regime or rule, and that is between 1972 and 1986, where there was just one president. There were pockets of elections or electoral activities, but these electoral activities are basically perceived to be without integrity and are designed to favor incumbents. So they were really not democratic elections the way democratic elections should be. And in 1983, the foremost opposition leader in the country, Benigno Aquino Junior, was assassinated and that triggered the middle class in the country to rise up. And there was then the incentive to look at the way the government and then elections are conducted in the Philippines. Because of pressure, the then incumbent President Marcos called for an unscheduled election, we called it SNAP presidential election 1986. And this provided an MP to those who were traditionally apathetic or those who are not politically involved to form or to volunteer in a group called National Citizens Movement for free elections. And this was the first non-governmental organization and movement that attracted a lot of people because there was this incentive to look at the electoral process to make sure that the previous practices of cheating and previous practices of cheating can be prevented. There was a lot of international coverage in the election and having a nationwide network of monitors was seen to be a way by which the administration then who controls the election would be prevented from, let's say, destroying the integrity of the process. So that was it and it was headed by basically private sector personalities and the core of this group were faith-based organizations, primarily the Catholic Church in the Philippines. Now, and yes, there was a transition from a basically authoritarian regime to a democratic regime and among those who were involved in the CSO or the Civil Society Initiative to monitor the elections became a member or even became the chair of the Election Commission in 1991. And that was Christian Munsod. And what followed was some sort of a reformist election commission because civil society personalities became part of the government of the Election Commission. And there was this and this sort of help speed up the transition from an authoritarian government setup to that of a democratic setup. So even the face of CSO participation in elections have changed. So from monitoring the electoral process, meaning the voting counting and the tabulation process as well as voter registration process, CSOs involved in elections have transformed or have adapted projects that involve proposing how election laws can be improved. There were even proposals to, you know, revisit the constitutional setup from a presidential form of government to one that is parliamentary. So in other words, what I'm saying is that, you know, from just looking at the process, the procedural aspect of election, meaning voting counting and tabulation, the civil society perspective became open to looking at reforms in the legal infrastructure of election. Okay, so and then there was this shift of focus also when the Philippines adopted the use of optical scan system in 2010 elections, people are now looking at the other aspects of elections like campaign finance, like looking at how inclusive the process is by, you know, focusing on voters that are vulnerable to being excluded in the process like indigenous people, like your persons with disabilities, like persons deprived of liberties or elections by those in detention. Now, so that is the history that I think I hope I was able to, you know, in very briefly narrate the transition of civil society involvement in election from that of just observing the process to to looking at the more substantive aspect of elections, the legal framework, the democraticness of elections, so that's how it developed. Now, of course, there are some issues also involving the relationship between election, the election management body and civil society organizations doing election work. And let me talk to you about that. Now, but, you know, we also have experienced the situation where, you know, EMBs and EMOs or EMO is an election monitoring organization or CSOs involved in elections. There's an enmity, you know, EMOs try to criticize the EMB for its performance and the EMBs try to shun away NGOs from participating or from, you know, from being involved in the process. Well, I have been to both side of the coin. So from my point of view, this is what causes the usual enmity between election management body and election monitoring organization. So sometimes election management body proceeds from a paradigm of authority. Since we are giving the mandate to run the election, it's our responsibility. We have the authority to make decision. But in so far as election management organization, in so far as CSOs are concerned, they are guided by defined norms and ideals of what election should be and how it should be run. So CSOs are more guided by the ideals of democratic, genuine democratic elections. So EMBs perspective is usually defined within the confines of a regulation framework, while CSOs are, you know, governed by the framework of maximum participation, meaning everyone should be involved in elections. And election management bodies have the legal responsibility to run elections to make it successful to, because they are ultimately legally responsible to the constitution, to the parliament and or to the president. Well, CSOs have moral responsibility to ensure that that elections really becomes meaningful to the people in the sense that you know, because in election, of course, sovereignty, as we say resides in the people, and that's where CSOs are guided in when they work on elections. Election management bodies, the reality is that election management bodies are constrained by bureaucratic structures and processes, you know, the function elections are election processes or formal election processes use government money. So, you know, there are audit requirements, there are bureaucratic government requirements that sometimes slows down the process of delivering elections, but, but, you know, CSOs are guided by urgency of reforms that, you know, they find government processes quite slow. But the CSOs would look at the delay as somewhat something that needs that may be hard to explain, or they cannot just accept the explanation of, you know, bureaucratic constraint as hampering a quicker resolution of issues that should lead to reform. Now election management bodies tend to have, tend to think that they have the monopoly of expertise in elections, and therefore think of others as people who don't know that much. But sometimes, on the other hand, civil societies think that they have the monopoly of good intentions that the election management bodies do not really have this in mind. So, these are the things that causes the conflict, causes conflicts between election management body and CSOs involved in elections. So, what is the goal there? I think it's important for CSOs and election management bodies to foster mutual understanding. Because anyway, CSOs and EMBs have common societal objectives. Both of them should, you know, aspire for free and fair election. Both of them should aspire for honest, orderly, and peaceful, safe elections. Both of them should look at inclusive, transparent, and accountable elections. Okay, both of them, both of that sector wants genuine democratic elections. So, there should really be no conflict between CSOs and EMBs. They just have to understand the respective roles in the society. So, election management bodies are primarily responsible for the success of the election and their decisions are usually final. However, election management bodies should also listen to what CSOs have to say in terms of what the common good is because CSOs articulate the aspirations of the people. And they have to understand that CSOs are guided by defined standards, which may not be easily understood by those in government. Now, so what should be the ideal relationship between government, election commission, or the secretariat of election, on the one hand, and on the other hand, civil society organizations or election monitoring organizations. One, they should, the relationship should be built on trust and mutual respect. And there should always be continuing dialogue and open lines of communication. Because what is what is going on between CSOs and government is usually proceeds, usually proceeds from mistrust. So a continuing dialogue and continuing open line of communication would somehow bridge the gap between the perspective of government and civil society. And maybe it's good to also involve in collaboration in finding solutions to problems in electoral process rather than, you know, presenting, rather than not talking and rather than, you know, throwing brickbats against each other. And it may be good that at the end of the day, both the government and the CSO share in the success in the conduct of election. So I have a few examples of how these were done in the Philippines. Now there are civil society groups which have, that have worked with the election commissions and has produced a good result like the groups that I've been involved with. The legal network for truthful election has been doing works for indigenous people and some, and it has partnered with the, partnered with the election commission to make the process more inclusive. So some of the suggestions that came from, from civil society were adopted as regulations by election commission. And at the end of the day, it improved the process like, for instance, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, PCIJ, had written some, you know, articles on campaign and political finance or money and politics issues. And that, you know, sort of gotten the attention of the election commission, and the election commission started energizing its, its, the whole bureaucracy to create a campaign finance office, whose job it is to look at the money, the expenses, and donations, expenses incurred by candidates during elections, and donations received by political parties. So, and just like in Indonesia, personalities of the Barrier Civil Society organization are invited in our Congress or in our parliament to as resource speaker in, in laws or electoral reform laws that are being deliberated in our legislature. But of course, it is also important for civil society group to keep an arm's length distance from the, from the government. And because that is their role, their role is to represent the people in looking at processes of the government to hold government accountable and, and, and to make sure that the government through the election commission does its work in, in, in, in election. So, you can collaborate, but you can, but while keeping an arm's length distance from government. So that is how effective civil society organizations have conducted themselves and it is not a, it has not always been the relationship has not always been good. But there is always, there should always be this attempt, and that is what both sides are doing to, to bridge some of the gaps and try to understand each other's position. So I think I will end there and I will welcome questions. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Louis. Thank you again to you and Miss Titi for your very comprehensive discussions around the experiences as well as your ongoing work in the various hats that you have talked to us about in the electoral spaces of both Indonesia and the Philippines. And now, ladies and gentlemen, I will open up the platform for questions. If you have any questions, please, if you can indicate that by your either through the emoji, or you can just turn on your screen and give me a wave and I'll hand over the platform to you. But I also note that we had received an advanced question from Miss Tantakubula, and if that has not been forwarded to the speakers, then I'm happy to, I see Miss Tantakubula here and if you'd like to ask his questions to the panelists then please feel free to do that. Now we open up the platform for questions this afternoon. Thank you. If there's any question, but otherwise, Miss Louis and Miss Titi, there was an advanced question that we had received and had been forwarded, you know, that we had received from Mr. Tantakubula. If you have not had the opportunity to see the questions, I'm happy to provide that for you. But first, and so the first question is in a situation where a government that came to power by military coup and has introduced a decreed constitution and electoral system that is rigged in favor of the government. What is the most effective way for an NGO with interest in electoral change to actively influence change? I know that you had spoken, Mr. Louis, about the challenges that the Philippine history that's probably similar in post-conflict societies like ours. So maybe I'll give you first the opportunity and then if Miss Titi would like to also contribute. Yes, thank you, Romulo. That's not an easy question to answer because of course Fiji has its own context, but it's really looking at democracy and how CSOs would see democracy flourishing in their own country. And that is, to me, I think there is a natural, somehow automatic progression on the part of CSOs to look at how democracy is in their country and how they can engage. Of course, my presentation and that of Titi's is based on a situation where there is already established government and the constitutional and legal framework seem to have been accepted by most of the population and the thing that you would try to look at are some things that are not as basic as probably the viability of the constitution itself being made to the term that was used was imposed on the country. So that's a very different situation, but I think there's a natural progression of civil society activation to look at how people can engage the government and perhaps take action on how things can be fixed at your end. And of course that will always start with raising awareness and creating a constituency of reform minded citizens that will specifically look at democratic reforms. I think that's the first step there. Thank you, Mr. Luya, Mr. Titi, would you like to add anything to that earlier comment over to you then. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Romulo. In Indonesia there was an attempted military coup in the early of 90s, but it failed. So we don't have like a government coup in Indonesia, but we were under an authoritarian government for more than 32 years. Then there was a people power in 1998 and followed by the recite nation or the step down of President Suharto. It's not easy to have 32 years of fascism or authoritarian regime. So it took a long time to fight for the democratic government, democratic regime like what we have now. One thing I learned because I'm part of the reform movement in 1998, together with Mr. Adi Aman. Actually, Adi Aman is my senior in university. External or international community support is playing a very significant role. How we can get other supports and learn and sharing knowledge and movement with other countries will help us to strengthen our movement. We have a massive student and university movement in 1997 until 1998. That's why and then Suharto resigned from his position and we have a massive reform process in Indonesia. But it is also not easy for Mr. Ramulo because now we have so many homework to deal with, especially on how we can strengthen the democratic institution, specifically political party. So we reform our voters, we reform our government, but sometimes we forget to reform our political parties. Now we are facing one of the biggest problem is dysfunction of political parties in Indonesia. So I can say that international community support, international organization supports to our movement is very important. Thank you. Thank you very much for highlighting those very important points and you know, I think what you really what you said is that it's an ongoing process. It's an ongoing engagement with civil society and with the political actors and the different bodies that infuse within the electoral space so thank you for that. Is there any question either from the Facebook audience or from any of our audience that are online via zoom. Otherwise, then we'll look at the other questions that have been sent in from Mr. I'll give this time if there's any question from the participants. All right, because of time, because of time, I will continue to move on and if there's any question then then we will come to the participants this afternoon. The second question that had been sent this morning is, is it possible for an NGO to influence change by trying to work with the electoral office and the politicians in the government. Have there been any progressive results achieved by NGOs that took this strategic approach. Maybe misty if you don't mind, I'll ask you if you can answer this first before I hand the platform to Mr. Lee. Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Romulo. I think I already a little bit explain about this in my presentation in my PPT. So it's very possible to influence the policy making process and also to influence the regulation making process. But as mentioned by Mr. Louis that every country has its specific situation in Indonesia, relatively CSO and parliament and government and EMBs, we can have a good cooperation without interference each other. For example, as I mentioned earlier in my presentation, in 2016, we formed a huge coalition to promote alternate draft on election law and then doing a massive advocacy to promote that draft to parliament, government, and then other stakeholders. And some of the provisions adopted by government and parliament and many of it's not adopted by them. So, but I think that's a good example that building a good cooperation and coalition among CSOs is one of the fundamental strategy. By having a coalition of CSO, at least we can accommodate many ideas from different groups from a woman activists, people with disability activists, and then minority groups, university actors, human right activists, we try to invite involvement of all of the organization. It's not easy, it takes long time to deal with so many heads, so many opinion, and also so many institution, but by having like international idea in international election foundation, I fast to support this coalition and this movement, at least we can achieve some of our goals. So, I'm sure that Indonesian situation is different with Fiji, but by having dialogue, by having an intense communication with the political actors with governments, we can achieve our goals. For example, Mr. Romulo, because I have a good relationship and communication with MPs, female MPs, female parliament MPs, members. So, I regularly talk to them about the ideas about our initiatives, and they are the female MPs, usually will deliver the ideas, the opinion to other, their other colleagues. That also helps us in advocating our issues. So, we try to build as a massive coalition we can do, and also talk intensively with the policy makers. Thank you, Mr. Romulo. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Iti, for your comprehensive response. You know, in cooperation as well as international support as two of the things that I could pick up from your response this afternoon. I thank you for that. I'll leave it at that and cross over to Mr. Louis, and then if there's anyone else in the audience that would like to do a follow up question, please feel free to unmute your screen and ask your question. Mr. Louis, would you like to respond to the same question? Yes, very quickly. Well, the same experience in the Philippines as it is in Indonesia, as is in Indonesia, most of the reforms actually in election administrations and the improvement of perspective within the election administration came from the participation of civil society group in the process. So, you know, looking at, you know, more giving focus on the vote, on voting by indigenous peoples, by persons with disabilities, these are concepts that came that were introduced by civil societies participating in the process with the election commission. Looking at campaign finance. Well, previously what election management body merely looks at the voting counting and, you know, the traditional usual things that you see in elections. But, you know, when civil society started recommending that the election commission should look at campaign finance as well. And then, you know, that made the election commission develop its capacity to monitor. Well, it's not perfect. There are a lot of things to improve on. But what I'm saying is that the initiative and the perspective comes from the civil society. This is what collaboration can do. And yes, you know, the civil society group or civil society organizations were able to come up with those kinds of recommendation because of international support. So there were also support from international donor organization which, you know, enabled civil society to work on this. So they are homegrown suggestions supported by, you know, international international organization inspired by international best practices probably. So yes, it happened in my country. Thank you, Mr. Louis. That's that's wonderful to hear that, you know, and as you constantly both emphasize that even though the context are different, that, you know, there's also that similarity when you see how the CSOs movements continue to advocate for the changes that is required in terms of and that's done through collaboration, as well as collisions. So thank you. Thank you for that point. Now, there are some questions that are popping up now on our chat screen. So Miss Titi and Mr. Louis, if you've had the opportunity to read that, if not, I'm happy to read through them and also for the benefit of our Facebook audience. But Miss Titi, there's a question here for you from Miss Lena Tameng, and she's asked that, can you say something about how you're able to build a broad CSO collision around electoral reform? And is there any tips on how to do the same elsewhere given that CSOs have their own goals and ambitions? I know you probably have not worked with the CSOs in Fiji, but you know, maybe in terms of Miss Lena's question, if you can see how that may work in Fiji's context. So over to you, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Romulo. It's a hard question, yeah. From my experience, it's not an uneasy activity, but we start by doing dialogue and communication. So dialogue and communication among CSOs is very important. Goodwill and then try hard to not like follow our ego is a main basis to have a good coalition. And also what I learned from my experiences, support from the senior activists was helping us to make it easier. Like in Indonesia, we have like Mr. Hadar Nafis-Gumay, one of the participants who follows this webinar from Facebook, and also Professor Ramlan Surbakti, Mr. Luigya know him so well. One of the very senior electoral academicians, they are, we talk to them and then discuss about the idea to have like alternate draft on the election law. And then by having support from IFAS, International Idea, many colleagues from university, academician, progressive community leaders, progressive religious leaders, and then we can form this coalition. So dialogue, communication, goodwill and try hard not to, what is it, use your ego is the key to form this coalition. It's not easy. And the second one is not all of our ideas accepted by government and parliament or policy makers. But in Indonesia, we have constitutional court. This is one of the product of reform process in 1998. We have constitutional court where we can go when we think that the articles in the law, what is it, contrary with the constitution. Usually when we think that the articles in the law against the constitution, me as a constitutional law, constitutional lawyer, went to constitutional court to fight for the better provisions on the law. So consistency is the second word to express what we do in doing electoral activism. It's not easy. It takes a long time. So if you are not consistent, you will so easy will give up. And sometimes we'll accept the offer to be part of the political parties or to be part of the government in power. So I think that's my comments on the question. Mr. Omulo. Thank you very much, Ms. City, for your question. Definitely. It's a difficult one. And again, context would be different. But thank you for showing us how at least you and your group in Indonesia have managed to address this challenge. You know, I hear about collision as well as looking at key partners to be able to continue to bring about that change. Now, before we continue with any other questions, I note that Ms. Terai, she's also here online had posted a question on this Zoom platform. Mr. Ray, if you are hearing me, I would you like to ask your question to the panelists. Mr. Ray, are you available? Okay, because of time. The question that she had posted Mr. Louis and Mr. City is in a society where the government refuses to engage in meaningful dialogues and I know that you had alluded to this a little bit earlier on Mr. dialogues with CSOs, especially those that speak out against the government, what can be done to ensure that collaboration between the two is fostered. So maybe I'll hand over to Mr. Louis and as a former member of EMB in the Philippines and how do you deal with personalities and those related challenges of working and making sure that you know it's the common goal of strengthening electoral processes. So over to you Mr. Louis and then maybe Ms. City if you'd like to also respond to that. Thank you. Yes, before I became a commissioner at the Philippine Election Commission, I was a what you call a civil society activist on electoral reform. So it can get frustrating when you know especially when the election management body wouldn't listen to what you have to say as to how things can be improved and they would have their own way. And that happens. Well, what is usually done is to create a demand, make them listen to you. And the only way to do that is to create a bigger constituency, maybe engage the media, talk about issues, make sense to general public. You know, at the end of the day, your politicians will be accountable or would listen to the people if you make enough noise, then they'll at the very least give you a venue where you can talk. And if it makes sense, then, you know, you'll be heard. Probably. I don't know. I mean, of course, PGN context is difficult but that's how it is done here. And if you would make politicians look good by listening to you, then there is more incentive for them to open their doors to having you. You have to understand where they're coming from. I mean they have to look good. They have to look nice. You have a good proposal. So probably you might want to share it with them, give them a bit of some ownership of what you have to propose as an activist, and perhaps things would open. Now, when I became part of the commission, that is what I had. I mean, I can never be successful if I don't listen to my former colleagues because all of these ideal things about democracy and about being inclusive came from my association with the civil society. So if I don't give them venue to participate, then I would not be achieving my purpose. I will amount to nothing. So perhaps what you can do is to, you know, of course you have to organize. You have to continue making noise and make them, well, I don't know if I can use this word. Force them to listen to you. Force them to talk to you. I think that can be done. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Louis. Miss Titi. Yeah, I think I have a similar comment to Mr. Louis, but I would like to add some points from my experiences if the policymakers, they don't want to listen to CSO activists or CSO institution. So we expand the de-advocacy work. We invite other groups to also talk about the issues, talk about the changes to be encouraged. For example, in Indonesia, we have two biggest Muslim organizations, Nahdatul Ulama and Muhammadiyah. So we talk to them because government and parliament willing to listen to them. We talk to big mass organization. And also we talk to the prominent academician who willing to promote reform. So we expand the narrative. We expand the message, not only delivered by us CSOs, but also by the religious organization leaders, public leaders, indigenous people leaders, and also prominent academicians. So we invite them to also join the movement and also media. We work with the independent journalists. So that's why we can deliver the message widely. That's my comment, Mr. Romulo. Thank you. Thank you for, for highlighting that other important aspect, as Mr. Luiz also alluded to the importance of within our context looking at how religious leaders and this influential community voices also can be strategic partners in raising electoral issues and electoral awareness. So that's that's very important also, I guess, for us here in Fiji. If there's any other members of the panel from any other panelists today, logging in if you'd like to ask any question. We have about three or four minutes before I will ask maybe Mr. Louis and Miss Titi, if you have any other concluding thoughts or remarks that you'd like to share with us on this very important topic. Particularly given the experiences that you have, as well as the ongoing challenges of CSO activism in the electoral spaces in Fiji. And then I'll ask you to then wrap up if there's no other question from the panelists but for now, we have, we have about two to three minutes. If there's anyone that would like to ask a question to any other panelists. Any question from panel members logging in today. If not, I'm happy to ask another question that's been posted up but I give this opportunity to anybody who'd like to ask a question first. There's a lot in your presentation to digest to the two speakers. So I'm sure there's a lot of thinking happening this afternoon. If not, there is a question that had been posted by Mr. Herman on the zoom chat that that and his question is to the speakers, democracy and elections are now international issues. Although in every country the issue of democracy and elections is different. However, it still boils down to aspects of law enforcement and human rights. So how do election activists in various countries collaborate to solve to solve this common problem in future. In the past now we've been very futuristic. So if you'd like to attempt to answer that question, then I give you the platform, maybe miss Titi, and then Mr. Louis to answer the question so over to you miss Titi. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for the question. Mr. Herman from Dompu is Nusa Tenggara. It's one of the city in Indonesian province. I'm very happy to have you here. Well, I think we cannot make a differentiation between election and human rights, because election is part of the human rights, how we fulfill the right to vote and to write to be candidate equally. So, from my experience, I try to have a like cooperation dialogue and also coalition between election NGOs and also human rights NGOs as I mentioned earlier, and also, I'm also part of the election international election community. To them is part of the unfrell movement, Asia Network for Free Election, member of ADN, Asia Democracy Network. So by having that international network, we hope that we can be part of the international movement, give response to the international situation. We have like a petition on Myanmar situation. We also promote petition on the democracy in Hong Kong. So by having like network with international organization, international movement, it helps us to adjust with the current progress and current issues on election and human rights. I think that's my comment, Mr. Romulo. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Appreciate it. Mr. Louis. Yes, I just want to reiterate what my friend to be said. Electoral rights are human rights, so you cannot really dissociate electoral elections and human rights, and it proceeds from a recognition of electoral rights being ingrained as what consists of human dignity. You don't have electoral rights and you don't have human rights, so that's how it is. And it's collaboration really amongst like-minded democracy activists. It's actually my occasional conversation with Titi, Pakadar, with some activists in Thailand, Malaysia that energizes my work in my own country. And it's really keeping the conversation amongst yourselves. In other words, the civil society groups in Fiji, they need not be democracy or election focused, but there is always a democracy and election aspect in what you do. If you are a gender rights advocate, if you are a human rights advocate, if you are economic equality advocates, there is always an election aspect to what you do. And it's good for you to collaborate among yourselves, at least bound by what should bring you in, and that's democratic rights, to promote your respective advocacy. And being connected with your fellow Malaysian civil society activists, looking at democracy and election as well, will help. And expanding it further to let's say your neighbors in Australia and perhaps in Southeast Asia, Indonesia and Philippines, will actually make you feel that you're not alone. And this is something that is innate in every human being, the right to participate in government. So be constantly connected, continue the conversation however difficult things are. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Louis. I think you know that's an important point also that you both raised as we're coming to the conclusion of this webinar, highlighting again the importance of this process to human rights and the rights of people not only to choose their government, but also to be governed by the government of their choice in that sense. So thank you both for highlighting those points. I'm extremely mindful that we may have a few minutes, but there's an important question that Mr. Ndakubu also sent in his list of questions that I'll probably also ask and give you the opportunity to respond to that and then maybe we can then move to wrapping up our webinar this afternoon. The final question is, how can Melanesian governments and outside NGOs effectively help activist NGOs in Fiji in their desire to achieve a fairer and more democratic electoral system. So basically, for the NGOs that do this work in Fiji and, you know, the challenges that they face etc. How can they tap into the networks and NGOs and people like yourselves to support and collaborate with them in building and strengthening their capacity as well as learning from some of the traits that you have successfully implemented in your respective countries. So maybe Mr. Louis, if you don't mind, I'll give you the platform first before Miss Titi and then we will wrap up our webinar this afternoon. Over to you, Mr. Louis. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Romolo. We're here. I think Titi will say the same thing. We're here. We're willing to help. You know your context better, but we can share our experience and probably you can pick some similarities that you can adopt in your own context. I just formed a small think tank. It's called Democratic Insights Group and it does works along the line of democratic reform. So, and there are other groups. Just be connected. Let's keep the conversation going. And if this can be supported by international donor organizations as well and this will be very good. So just that probably Romolo, the challenges are. There will be difficulty. We have not achieved the ideal even if we have been doing this for 30, 40 years probably. But just go on. Just keep on doing what we need to do. That's it. Thank you very much, Mr. Louis, for those nuggets. Before I wrap up, I'll hand over to Miss Titi and then of course we'll conclude our discussions. Yeah, I think it's a very interesting and important question. Yeah, follow to Mr. Louis statement that every country is unique, every election system is unique. There's no ideal election system to each country but what we are looking for is a fit election system. I can learn from other countries. Me, myself, my organization, Paludem, and I'm sure my colleagues from Indonesian CSOs committed to continuing to communicate and share knowledge and experiences with CSOs in PG. In the long process, it requires patience, consistency, more and more dialogue, and by having international ideas and many international organizations bridging our cooperation, bridging our discourse, I think it will help us to strengthen each other. I'm sure that democracy is like a cycle. Now in Indonesia, believe it or not, we have CSO, what is it, watch CSO watch, not to ensure the freedom of CSOs in doing their activities, but to what is it to observe, to monitor the CSO activists. So, I think that's one of the challenges, one of the challenges we face now in Indonesia. We not only facing challenges from political actors, but also we face a challenge from our colleagues from civil society, or who call themselves as civil society. I think that's my response, Mr. Romulo, we have to strengthen each other. We have to communicate, we have to share, and what is it we have to stay in touch, keep contact to what is it to keep democracy moving on. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much, Miss Titi. I'm sure that your context, you know, you've both offered to continue the dialogue, your context are, and is available with the International Ideas Office, Mr. Rajan, Mr. Adi, and if there's any interest from any of the CSO groups that are watching this today or will be watching it in the future, maybe they could contact you both, if that's all right from your end. That then, of course, brings us to the conclusion of this webinar. But before I wrap up the dialogue and the discussions, is there any last thoughts you'd like to share with us today? I know that it's probably still early in the morning in both your regions. It's going to the afternoon here in Fiji about to about four o'clock, but if you have any last nuggets of wisdom you'd like to share with us, maybe I'll give you a minute each or so, and then I'll wrap up our discussion for today. Miss Titi, first to you please. Yeah, I thank International Idea for providing this forum. I learned a lot from the questions and also from Mr. Louis, me and Mr. Louis have a long cooperation, and also I learned a lot also from him, and for the future I would like to still communicate and having cooperation with all CSOs from Fiji. Please don't mind, don't feel hesitated to contact me. I'm very happy to share my knowledge and experience. Thank you so much. Thank you. Mr. Louis. Yes, I would like to thank International Idea, Adi, Lina, Rajan and everyone there, of course Romulo for that excellent facilitation, and it's really, you know, being patient, I think Titi emphasized that it's not going, things are not going to happen overnight, the challenges are enormous. I saw a comment by my friend Pak Hadar Gumay when he said, you know, we can advance democracy but there will always be those who will pull it back. So it is a constant fight, it's a constant struggle, but CSOs have to be there, they have to just be patient, they have to continue the conversation, and yes we will make ourselves available. I don't think it's going to be an issue with me and Titi and I speak from experience because just like what Titi said, I've learned a lot from my occasional conversations with her. In fact, the last time was when she was invited to talk about the local elections in Indonesia under COVID situation and that somehow informed civil society perspective in how we can conduct our own elections next year under COVID. So you see, when we talk and we converse and we continue to keep the line open, we can actually benefit from shared knowledge and experiences. So let's do that. Thank you very much, Mr. Louis, Ms. Titi, we congratulate you both for not only the extensive experience you bring to this conversation today, but the work that you continue to do for the democratic and electoral processes of your respective countries. So thank you for being gracious with your time and your expertise to share that with us. What I've learned in summary from today's conversation is that, you know, not only has it been an informative dialogue, but it has also provided provoking insights on how you have worked with your challenges, with your resources, with your networks and to create the opportunities that is needed to bring the electoral changes in both Indonesia and the Philippines. Both of you obviously are giants in your own right, providing extensive experiences to the CSOs as well as within the government sector and through the legislative process to bring about the legislative changes that is needed to continue to strengthen the electoral frameworks in Indonesia and Philippines respectively. And of course you've also highlighted that despite the significant contextual differences that the universal principles of democratic elections and the values that are associated with democratic elections are somewhat common across the democratic divide and across our different societies. So, you know, in summary, of course, there is no perfect system. There's no perfect electoral system. There are many challenges that CSOs will face, but learning from each other as well as talking to each other and building collisions is an important way forward to ensure that CSOs remain engaged and active in this space. The, of course, the ongoing discussions and dialogue from strengthening to on strengthening the electoral systems and people is important. And particularly in order to realize this fundamental human right, the rights of people to choose their government needs to constantly be safeguarded, not only by the legal frameworks that are in place, but also especially by CSOs and the community of voices that continue to speak to strengthen our electoral system. Having said that, you know, I know it is only left from me from my end as the moderator to thank you. Salamat to you, Mr. Louis, terima kasih, to you, Miss Titi. Thank you again to each and every participant logging in from Fiji from the Pacific and right across the world in particular to our friends from Indonesia and other Asian countries that are also logging in. So those that will be following this post dialogue. Thank you for being part of this very important conversation on democratic development in Melanesian states, but in this context for Fiji. Thank you to the fantastic team at International Idea, both your officers in Europe and in Australia. Thank you for creating this platform, it's an important platform, and it needs to be an ongoing one. As we continue to build knowledge, experience, and work with each other in strengthening our electoral spaces. So from me to you all, thank you, Salamat, and terima kasih. Thank you, everyone.