2016

FACTS & FIGURES #29: THE URBAN POOR COMMUNITY’S KNOWLEDGE ON THE 2017 COMMUNE ELECTION

Date of publication: October 2016

Published by: Sahmakum Teang Tnaut

Research Team: Khun Tola, Community Officer

Mao Veasna, Community Officer

Sorn Sokhret, Research Intern

Chreuk Sophea, Research Intern

Data Analysis: Korm Chanraksmey, Research Officer

Research Consultant: Sarah Rose-Jensen

Editor: Jessica Sercombe, Programme Advisor STT would like to thank everyone who participated in the research, in particular the local authorities and residents living in Village 23, Smor San and Rolous Cheung Ek. Supported in part by grants from Misereor and Diakonia. Sahmakum Teang Tnaut, October 2016 #7, Street 494, Phnom Penh, Cambodia Tel: (855) 23 555 1964 Email: info@teangtnaut.org Web: www.teangtnaut.org Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/teangtnaut/

2016

The Urban Poor Community’s Knowledge on the 2017 Commune

Election

2016 i

Contents Chapter 1: Introduction............................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Aims and Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Research Questions........................................................................................................................ 3

1.4 Key Findings of the Research .......................................................................................................... 3

1.5 Scope of Research .......................................................................................................................... 3

Chapter 2. Methodology and Profile of the Study Area............................................................................. 4

2.1 Type of Research ............................................................................................................................ 4

2.1.1 Selection Criteria ......................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.2 Sample Size ................................................................................................................................. 4

2.2 Data Collection Method ................................................................................................................. 5

2.2.1 Primary Data Sources and Analysis .............................................................................................. 5

2.2.1. A Preliminary Site Visit ........................................................................................................... 5

2.2.1. B Household Survey ............................................................................................................... 5

2.2.1.C Key Informant Interviews (KII) .............................................................................................. 5

2.2.2 Secondary Data ........................................................................................................................... 5

2.2.3 Quantitative Data Analysis .......................................................................................................... 5

2.4 Profile of the Study Areas ............................................................................................................... 6

2.4.1 Profile of Village 23 ..................................................................................................................... 7

2.4.2 Profile of Rolous Cheung Ek ......................................................................................................... 9

2.4.3 Profile of Smor San .................................................................................................................... 11

2.5 Demographic Information ............................................................................................................ 13

Chapter 3. Accessing Information ........................................................................................................... 17

Chapter 4. Legal Procedures and the Communities’ Knowledge of the Commune Elections.................... 19

4.1 Legal Procedures .......................................................................................................................... 19

4.2 Knowledge on the Election’s Registration Process ........................................................................ 21

4.3 Communities’ Awareness on Voter Participation .......................................................................... 25

Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendations ....................................................................................... 28

2016 ii

5.1 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 28

5.2 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................... 29

Annexes ................................................................................................................................................. 30

Annex 1: Household Survey Questionnaire ........................................................................................ 30

SECTION 1: Demographic Information ........................................................................................... 30

SECTION 2: Owning Property Related to Accessing Information ..................................................... 31

SECTION 3: Legal Procedures ......................................................................................................... 31

SECTION 4: Voter’s Knowledge on the Election Registration Process .............................................. 32

Annex 2: Key Informant Interview (KII) Checklists .............................................................................. 35

Checklist 1: Key Informants with the Commune Chief from Rolous Cheung Ek Community ................ 35

Checklist 2: Key Informants with the Neutral and Impartial Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (NICFEC) ............................................................................................................................ 35

Checklist 3: Key Informants with the Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (COMFREL) 36

Checklist 4: Key Informants with the National Election Committee of Cambodia (NEC) ...................... 36

Annex 3: Letter for Interview Request ................................................................................................ 37

2016 iii

List of Figures Figure 1: Location of Origin ........................................................................................................14

Figure 2: Migration Year ............................................................................................................15

Figure 3: Highest Education Level ..............................................................................................16

Figure 4: Current Primary Job ....................................................................................................16

Figure 5: Any particular reason for lacking these documents? ...................................................20

Figure 6: What are the requirement to be able to register to votes? .........................................21

Figure 7: How did you learn you had to register to be able to vote? ..........................................22

Figure 8: How did you learn about the registration process? .....................................................24

Figure 9: Did you encounter any difficulties during the registration process? ............................25

Figure 10: Reason for non-participation in the previous commune election ..............................26

Figure 11: How did you learn about the forthcoming commune election? .................................26

Figure 12: Reasons for participating in the forthcoming commune election...............................27

Figure 13: Reason for non-participation in the forthcoming commune election.........................27

List of Tables

Table 1: Overall Sample Size ........................................................................................................4

Table 2: Basic Demographics .....................................................................................................13

Table 3: Ownership of Electronic Devices ..................................................................................17

Table 4: Means of Accessing Information...................................................................................18

Table 5: IC Ownership Information ............................................................................................19

Table 6: Number of answers chosen for ‘What are the requirements for voter registration?’ ....22

List of Maps

Map 1. Location of the three communities (source: STT’s Phnom Penh Survey 2014) ..................6

Map 2. Village 23 Community (Source: Open Street Map) ...........................................................8

Map 3. Rolous Cheung Ek community ........................................................................................10

2016 iv

List of Abbreviations COMFREL: Committee for Free and Fair Elections IC: Identity Card KII: Key Informant Interviews LEMNA: Law on the Election of Members to the National Assembly NEC: National Election Committee NGO: Non-Governmental Organization NICFEC: Neutral and Impartial Committee for Free and Fair Elections RGC: Royal Government of Cambodia STT: Sahmakum Teang Tnaut UDF: Urban Poor Development Fund

2016 1

Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Introduction In June 2017 elections will be held for Commune Council membership across Cambodia, followed by national elections in July 2018. The 2013 national elections were marred by considerable controversy, including – as has been the case with previous elections - concerns about voter registration fraud.1 Work is currently underway to create a completely new voter register and implement a new registration system that uses biometrics in order to combat voter registration fraud. However, a pilot of this initiative at the end of 2015 highlighted that there may be significant barriers to registration under this system due to many Cambodians not possessing a Khmer Citizen Identity Card (IC).2 Article 44 of the 2015 amended version of the Law on the Election of Members to the National Assembly (LEMNA) states that:

The surname, given name, sex and date of birth of each voter shall be extracted from his/her Khmer Citizen Identity Card. (LEMNA 2015, p 12.) 3

The voter registration requirements specified in the LEMNA also cover the requirements for registration to vote in the commune elections.4 Thus, under the current legislation, those who do not possess a valid IC will not be able to register to vote in either of the upcoming elections. However, if they possess a legal document that proves their Cambodian nationality, citizens are eligible to apply for an IC, and/or are eligible to register to vote.5 In its 2015 annual report on democracy, elections, and reform in Cambodia, the Committee for Free and Fair Elections (COMFREL), a Cambodian NGO specializing in promoting democratic elections, stated that it is “most likely these difficulties [i.e. insufficient distribution of ICs] will persist until the next Commune Council election in 2017”.6 Further to this, three types of ICs are currently in use: a paper version, a plastic card, and a plastic card with an electronic chip. Each of these card types can be used to vote in the upcoming commune election. Distribution of the latter commenced in 2015 by the Ministry of Interior, and as of March 2016, 7.2 million cards had reportedly been distributed.7 Currently there is a lack of information about the demographics of those who do and do not possess an IC. It has already been established that monks face barriers in securing ICs,8 as do

1 Committee for Free and Fair Elections (COMFREL). (2016) Survey Report on Votes List, Voter Registration and Audit of Voters List 2011. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Retrieved from http://www.comfrel.org/eng/components/com_mypublications/files/830778Voter_Survey_2011__SVRA_Final_Eng.pdf 2 Ibid. 3Law on the Election of Members to the National Assembly of 2015. Retrieved from http://ngocedaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/tmp_11849-Draft-of-LEMNA-by-CNRP-CPP_March_08_2015132491924.pdf 4 Cambodia Disabled People’s Organization (CDPO). (2015). Disability Inclusion in the Voter Registration Processes. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Retrieved from http://www.ifes.org/sites/default/files/cdpo_report_the_challenges_lessons_learned_and_good_practices.pdf 5 Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction (MLMUPC). (2016). Sub-Decree on Khmer Nationality Identity Cards. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Retrieved from: http://www.skpcambodia.com/Laws%20&%20Regulations%20of%20the%20Kingdom%20of%20Cambodia/Property%20&%20Land%20Law/ANK-36-96-Cambodian-ID-Card-E.pdf) 6 Committee for Free and Fair Elections (COMFREL). (2016) Democracy Elections and Reform in Cambodia: Annual Report 2015. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Retrieved from http://www.comfrel.org/eng/components/com_mypublications/files/803311DemocracyElectionandReform2015.pdf 7 Ros C. (2016, March 7). Interior Ministry Pushes The Adoption of Electronic ID Cards. The Khmer Times. Retrieved from http://www.khmertimeskh.com/news/22401/interior-ministry-pushes-the-adoption-of-electronic-id-cards/ 8 Chea T. (2016, January 20). National Election Committee Addressing ID Challenges. The Khmer Times. Retrieved from http://www.khmertimeskh.com/news/20311/national-election-committee-addressing-id-challenges/

2016 2

people with disabilities9 and indigenous people.10 Similarly, the pilot of the new voter registration system highlighted that many elderly people do not possess ICs because they are no longer working.11 However, sufficient information is still lacking on whether other marginalized populations are also restricted from accessing the necessary documentation to register, or whether if it is due to other factors. Such information is essential to ensure that the views from all sections of Cambodia’s population are represented within this important democratic process. However, lack of an IC is not the only potential barrier to successful voter registration. A study by the Cambodian Center for Human Rights in 2011 highlighted that among participants – who came from the breadth of Cambodia - there was confusion about the registration process which was understood to be a significant barrier to successful registration.12 While the LEMNA has since been revised it cannot be assumed that the new voter registration process will effectively address this issue. A survey by COMFREL, also conducted in 2011, after voter registration for the 2012 commune elections, found that in 30% of the areas observed no information about the voter registration process was made available at the village level.13 Furthermore, the study found that among Cambodian youth, many did not register to vote because “they [did] not have the required documents, [had] no interest in voting, no understanding of the importance of the election, a lack of information regarding voting, believe[d] that political parties are unreliable, or [had] migrated.”14 Phnom Penh’s urban poor are a marginalized group which has yet to be examined in terms of level of knowledge on voter registration. As such, this research seeks to fill this knowledge gap. It examines whether urban poor residents currently possess an IC or intend to obtain one prior to the voter registration period. It also considers whether those who do not have an IC have the necessary documentation to be able to obtain one, and reasons why such residents may lack such documentation. This study also examines understanding of the pre-requisites for registration and the registration process. Awareness of the upcoming communal elections is also assessed. In undertaking this examination, this research takes into account factors such as gender, education, type of work, and access to information sources which could influence the ability to register to vote.

1.2 Aims and Objectives The overall aim of this research was to investigate urban poor community members’ knowledge on the registration process for the upcoming 2017 commune elections, with a focus on whether urban poor communities have the means to register and are choosing to register in order to vote.

9 Cambodia Disabled People’s Organization (CDPO). (2015). Disability Inclusion in the Voter Registration Processes. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Retrieved from http://www.ifes.org/sites/default/files/cdpo_report_the_challenges_lessons_learned_and_good_practices.pdf 10 Cambodian Center for Human Rights (CCHR). (2011). Strengthening Electoral Processes and Democratic Practices in Cambodia: Report on Forums on Elections and Democratic Space. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Retrieved from http://www.cchrcambodia.org/admin/media/report/report/english/2011-07-20-report-eng.pdf 11Mayr, M., Hör. R. and Vogel, J. (2016, January). Test Run of Voter Registration Evaluated. Konrad Andenaur Stiftung Newsletter. Retrieved from http://www.kas.de/wf/doc/kas_18158-1442-2-30.pdf?160121075313 12 Ibid. 13 The Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (COMFREL). (2012). Votes List, Voters Registration and Audit of Voters List 2011. Retrieved from http://www.comfrel.org/eng/components/com_mypublications/files/830778Voter_Survey_2011__SVRA_Final_Eng.pdf 14 Ibid. pg. 7.

2016 3

The research objectives were: To review whether urban poor community members in Phnom Penh possess legal

documents to allow them to register for the upcoming commune elections; To examine the urban poor community members’ knowledge of the documents

required to allow them to register for the upcoming commune elections; To examine the urban poor community members’ knowledge of how to register for

the upcoming commune elections.

1.3 Research Questions To what extent do the respondents know about the voter registration system and the documents needed to register?

How many respondents possess the necessary documents required to vote? Which legal documents do the respondents possess and what documents are they

missing in order to register to vote? What are the respondents’ key reasons for not owning the legal documents to vote?

1.4 Key Findings of the Research A high proportion of respondents have an IC and of those respondents that did not

have an IC, almost half of them had another relevant legal document that would allow them to apply for an IC and register to vote;

Respondents, whilst having access to electronic media, still have a limited understanding of the whole election process and rely on contact with the local authorities to be informed of the election process;

Respondents are eager to participate in the upcoming commune and national elections.

1.5 Scope of Research This survey, which consists of 37 questions, was administered in three communities with a total of 237 respondents. The survey instrument collected demographic information, ownership rates of technology to receive information, and respondents’ understanding of voter eligibility and how to register to vote in the commune elections.

2016 4

Chapter 2. Methodology and Profile of the Study Area 2.1 Type of Research This research applied both descriptive and exploratory approaches. To gather all relevant information both qualitative and qualitative methods were used, including a household survey and key informant interviews. Key informant interviews (KII) were conducted with representatives from government bodies, such as the National Election Committee (NEC) and the Commune Chief from Rolous Cheung Ek community,15 as well as staff of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) including COMFREL and Neutral and Impartial Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (NICFEC).

2.1.1 Selection Criteria The three communities, Village 23, Rolous Cheung Ek and Smor San, were selected as case studies for this report. These communities were selected because they are typical of urban poor settlements in Phnom Penh, where community members are at risk of experiencing difficulties in registering to vote. As will be shown below, these communities have multiple vulnerabilities, including lack of access to municipal services, threat of eviction, and ethnic minority populations. Further, STT has an existing relationship with these communities, which aided staff in identifying community members to be surveyed.

2.1.2 Sample Size Overall, 237 respondents were interviewed from all three communities in Phnom Penh as shown in Table 1 below. Table 1: Overall Sample Size

Target area Number of Respondents

Total Population of Target Area

Village 23 79 248 Rolous Cheung Ek 63 200 Smor San 95 680 Total 237 1128

15 STT contacted the commune chiefs from Village 23 and Smor San community for an interview, but the requests were declined.

2016 5

2.2 Data Collection Method

2.2.1 Primary Data Sources and Analysis

2.2.1. A. Preliminary Site Visit Before conducting the household survey, STT’s research team visited the three selected study sites. The team observed the three communities’ general living conditions, the geographical area, and familiarized themselves with the field site. They engaged with the residents of the community to start identifying the target respondents to approach for the survey. Such observations and prior engagements provided the team with the relevant context to develop the research methodology and household survey questionnaire.

2.2.1. B. Household Survey A structured questionnaire was utilized to gather the relevant information from the individual respondents. The interview was conducted over a period of two months between June and July 2016. The interviewers went from door to door of the different households, from 9am to 5pm carrying out the interviews. If any follow up was required, the interviewers would return to the households the following day. The approximate time to complete one questionnaire with each respondent was between fifteen to thirty minutes.

2.2.1.C. Key Informant Interviews Key informant interviews were conducted with the Commune Chief from Rolous Cheung Ek and staff from the NEC and two NGOs, NICFEC and COMFREL. KII were essential to capture qualitative data on current policies and initiatives being implemented by these agencies pertaining to the 2017 Commune Election. Representatives from each organisation were contacted to formally request a face-to-face interview, which was conducted using open ended, semi-structured interview questions (template attached in Annex 1). Each interview lasted approximately 60 minutes.

2.2.2 Secondary Data The secondary data was collected from a range of sources including NGO reports, media articles, government reports, academic papers and other available publications.

2.2.3 Quantitative Data Analysis The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to collate and analyze the quantitative data collected. Both basic and advanced statistical analysis techniques were applied, which included the following: a. Frequency and percentage tools were applied to analyze demographic data and the respondent’s knowledge of the voter registration process by using tables and figures. This technique intends to show how many instances there are of each variable. b. Cross-tabulation table was used to depict the number of times each of the possible category combinations occurred in the sample data. A cross-tabulation normally summarizes the relationship between two categorical variables.

2016 6

2.4 Profile of the Study Areas The location of each of the three communities in relation to each other, and to the capital of Phnom Penh, are represented in the map below.

Map 1: Location of the three communities

2016 7

2.4.1 Profile of Village 23

Village 23 community is located along the railway in Group 107, Sangkat Boeung Kak II, Khan Toul Kork, Phnom Penh. The community size is 24,219m2, and consists of 187 households and 200 families, with a population size of 248 people.16 The first settlement in this area was in 1982, and in 1997 the residents organized themselves as a local community, informally selecting representatives on the community’s behalf. The community has access to rubbish collection, a sewage system, national electricity and water supply. However, some community members are connected to the water and electricity through a private supplier, due to not owning any official documentation, which prevents them from registering with national suppliers. Streetlights have not been installed in the community. Village 23 established a community saving scheme in 2012, whereby funds collected are used to support costs for community infrastructural development and other urgent community needs. For instance, in April 2004 a fire destroyed 70 households, and funds from the saving scheme were used to help rebuild the homes for the affected families. In 2011, the local authority informed Village 23 residents that they were illegally living on public land. The community is situated alongside an obsolete railway which the Cambodian government plans to develop as a route from Phnom Penh to Kilometer Number 6. In the same year, a community census was conducted by the local authority, which stated that people living within 20 meters of the railway were illegal and were required to vacate the area. As a result, the community staged a number of protests to advocate against being evicted. The community residents have not been provided with any details of when the re-construction is due to take place, and continue to call upon the local authorities to release the details as public information. On 11 August 2016, representatives from Village 23 gathered in front of City Hall, and managed to meet with the Phnom Penh Governor. The Governor assured them they would not be evicted and stated that a public forum would be organized to discuss the railway development plans. For now, the residents of Village 23 continue to wait for further details on the future prospects of their community. In the meantime, the community is in the process of applying for land titles and is implementing infrastructural developments to improve living area. Since 2012, STT has Worked collaboratively with the community to conduct community mapping and construct electricity pillars in their neighborhood.

16 As of 2016, when STT carried out the research on the community’s profile.

2016 8

Map 2: Village 23 Community

2016 9

2.4.2 Profile of Rolous Cheung Ek

Rolous Cheung Ek community is located in Group 3, Rolous Cheung Ek, Dangkor, Phnom Penh. The community is 5,364m2 in area size, and consists of 57 households which are occupied by 89 families, totaling to approximately 200 residents.17 Residents, who started settling on the former-farm land between 1999 and 2004, are primarily of Khmer and Kampuchea Krom ethnicity. In 2009, the village chief organized the settlement as a community in cooperation with the Urban Poor Development Fund (UPDF), which works in collaboration with the municipality of Phnom and the Asian Coalition for House Rights under a memorandum of understanding. Since 2013, the community has been under threat of eviction, when khan (district) officials informed the community that they live on state public land that belongs to the community. Due to the nature of how the settlement was formed, Rolous Cheung Ek community have not undergone the Systematic Land Registration process. None of the families have formal land titles. The community has requested land titles from the khan (district) and sangkat (commune) authorities, but they have yet to be successful. Rolous Cheung Ek community is situated near Boeung Choueng Ek Lake which the families are able to fish in and grow vegetables near, contributing to their livelihoods and sustenance. The community can access electricity via the national electricity suppliers and acquire water from the Phnom Penh Water Supply Authority, as well as use communal wells to collect rainwater. The residents still lack basic amenities, such as access to rubbish collection services or communal streetlights, affecting hygiene and safety levels in the area. STT has been working closely with the community since 2009 to help improve basic infrastructure. In collaboration with the community, STT also carried out community mapping of the area and helped to distribute learning materials to the community’s children, such as notebooks. In 2000, the community set up a communal savings scheme which was administered by the commune chief and involves 30 families from Rolous Cheung Ek, as well as 10 families residing outside of the community.

17 As of 2015, when STT carried out the research on the community’s profile.

2016 10

Map 3: Rolous Cheung Ek community

2016 11

2.4.3 Profile of Smor San

Smor San community first settled in the area in 1982, on former cemetery land, which is state public land, in Group 5, Deum Sleng Village, Sangkat Chhbar Ampov 2, Khan Meanchey, Phnom Penh. The community area size is 2,466m2 and consists of a total of 140 households, 170 families, and 680 people,18 and is located nearby another community consisting of approximately 60 households, and combined they are all part of the same village. In 2014, the community members informally organised themselves as a village area. The residents consist of Khmer, Kampuchea Krom and Vietnamese ethnicities. The community is accessible via a one-lane concrete road. The community does not have access to a proper drainage system, or waste collection service. The residents either dispose of waste in the nearby river or bury or burn it. Flooding during the rainy season is an ongoing problem for the residents, due to the lack of drainage, and families have reported circumstances where flooding has lasted more than four weeks. Residents are connected to the state electricity and water supply. The community is located nearby a state primary and secondary school, a healthcare center, a local market, and National Road 1. In 2014, a formal, verbal eviction notice was issued to Smor San community by the khan (district) chief. The khan chief stated that the community is an illegal settlement on state public land, which was due to undergo development. The residents have not been provided with any further information on an eviction date or whether compensation will be issued. The community has not undergone the Systematic Land Titling process, and none of the families have been granted land titles outside of this process. The community plans to seek land tenure and find ways to protect their land and houses. They are also looking for means to address their community’s infrastructural challenges, particularly the lack of streetlights, drainage system, and rubbish collection, which they contend are affecting peoples’ health. STT engages with the community to help monitor their situation, and

record details on their current circumstances.

18 As of 2014, when STT carried out the research on the community’s profile.

2016 12

Map 4. Smor San Community

2016 13

2.5 Demographic Information

A total of 237 respondents were interviewed across the three communities. A summary of the demographics for these samples can be found in Table 2 below. A higher proportion of interviewees were female (62%), due to their fact that more women were available during the times the surveys were conducted, whereas the male community members are predominantly offsite for work. Across all three communities, 51% were between 21 – 40 years old. And, in all three areas, 74% of the respondents were married, whilst 18% were widows or widowers. Table 2: Basic Demographics

Attributes Village 23 Rolous

Cheung Ek Smor San Overall

(N=79) (N=63) (N=95) (N=237) % % % %

Gender

Male 40.5 39.6 33.6 37.5 Female 59.5 60.3 66.3 62.4 Age group

20 and below 2.5 3.1 1.0 2.1 21-40 46.8 58.7 51.5 51.9 41-60 35.4 23.8 32.6 31.2 61 and above 15.2 14.2 14.7 14.7 Marital Status

Married 75.9 84.1 66.3 74.2 Widow/Widower 12.6 9.5 28.4 18.1 Single 11.3 6.3 5.2 7.6 Divorced/Separated 0 0 0 0

In each community around 50-60% of the interviewees originated from Phnom Penh, equating to an average of 57% when cross comparing the results. Those that were not from the Phnom Penh (42%) reported they had migrated from other provinces, the majority (33%) had migrated between 1990 and 2000. Prime Minister Hun Sen’s recent encouragement of citizens’ (who live far from their hometowns) to register to vote near where they work rather than their province of origin aims to increase voter participation for demographics such as the 42% of respondents who have migrated to Phnom Penh.

2016 14

Figure 1: Location of Origin

The survey’s findings show that 45% of the respondents across the three communities had not participated in any form of formal education. Smor San community had the highest number of respondents who had not attended school (52%), followed by Rolous Cheung Ek (50%), and Village 23 (31%). Of the 54% which had received an education, the majority had left school between grades 6 and 10 and only 5% attended through to grade 11 or 12. Only one respondent (from Village 23) had undergone higher education, receiving a Master’s degree. Given the low education levels of the respondents and Cambodia’s overall low rate of literacy

(the National Population Census found a 37% rate of functional literacy for adults in 2008),19 it highlights urban poor community members as a most vulnerable group that will most likely rely on the local authorities for assistance in the election process.

19 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (2016). Literacy (Cambodia). Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/phnompenh/education/learning-throughout-life/literacy/

0102030405060708090

100

57.4

8.0 7.2 5.9 5.9 4.6 3.8 1.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.4 0.4

PERC

ENTA

GELocation of origin

2016 15

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

33.0 30.1

18.5 18.4

PERC

ENTA

GE

Migration Year

Figure 2: Migration Year Across the communities, 27% of the respondents indicated that they were not formally employed and stayed at home focusing predominantly on their household’s domestic needs.20 The most common primary job, for those actively in paid work, was self-employment, followed by labor (such as in garment factories or in construction), and other forms of informal employment such as fisherman and motordop taxi driver.

20 The ‘Current Primary Job’ trends will convey results skewed more toward female respondents, as over half the respondents in each community were female as the interviews were conducted during the day (refer to Table 2: ‘Basic Demographics’).

2016 16

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

No Study Grade 6 toGrade 10

Grade 1 toGrade 5

Grade 11 toGrade 12

Masters

45.2

32.1

16.5

5.90.4

PERC

ENTA

GEHighest Education Level

Figure 3: Highest Education Level

0102030405060708090

100

27.0 25.320.3

14.48.0 3.4 1.7

PERC

ENTA

GE

Current Primary Job

Figure 4: Current Primary Job

2016 17

Chapter 3. Accessing Information The questionnaire aimed to acquire research data on how urban poor communities typically accessed information on the commune elections and the forms of technology which they own. The intention was to determine whether there was any correlation between ownership of electronic devices, access to information, and the level of awareness of the registration process for the 2017 commune elections. Overall, the results show that in each of the communities there is a considerable number of respondents who own electronic devices, particularly television sets (85%), smartphones (48%) and radio sets (32%). Table 3: Ownership of Electronic Devices

Attributes Village 23 Rolous

Cheung Ek Smor San Overall

(N=79) (N=63) (N=95) (N=237) % % % %

Television

Owns television 93.6 80.9 81.0 85.2 Does not own television 6.3 19.0 18.9 14.7 Smart Phone

Owns smart phone 79.7 36.5 29.4 48.1 Does not own smart phone 20.2 63.4 70.5 51.8 Radio

Owns radio 77.2 11.1 10.5 32.9 Does not own a radio 22.7 88.8 89.4 67.0 When asked what media sources they used to access information in general, television came out on top for 50% of the responses, followed by neighbor/community (20%) and radio (13%). However the order of results were surprisingly different, when respondents were asked how they primarily retrieved information specific to the commune elections: 44% of the responses named the village chief, 30% said the television, and 10% said neighbor/community. These responses show that whilst the ownership of electronic devices is relatively widespread, this does not necessarily equate to an increased reliance on these devices for information in general. Specifically, for information on the commune elections, respondents primarily relied on the village chief. Further details on voter awareness and sources informing respondents on the commune election process are discussed in ‘Section 4’.

for information on the commune elections,

respondents primarily relied on the village

chief

2016 18

Table 4: Means of Accessing Information

Attributes Village 23 Rolous

Cheung Ek Smor San Overall

(N=79) (N=63) (N=95) (N=237) % % % %

What type of media/or sources of information do you access? (Multiple answers)

Television 48.0 52.8 50.7 50.1 Neighbor/community 6.6 29.2 30.7 20.6 Radio 26.6 3.3 4.6 13.2 Facebook 14.6 3.3 1.5 7.3 Family/friend 0.0 11.2 11.5 6.7 Newsletter/poster 4.0 0 0.7 1.9 Where do you get your information about the commune elections? (Multiple answers)

Village chief 38.0 47.8 47.7 43.9 Television 36.8 26.6 26.1 30.4 Neighbor/community 3.0 14.8 16.5 10.8 Radio 13.5 2.1 1.9 6.5 Family/friend 0 7.4 7 4.3 Facebook 5.5 1.0 0 2.4 Newsletter/poster 3.0 0.0 0.6 1.4

2016 19

Chapter 4. Legal Procedures and the Communities’

Knowledge of the Commune Elections 4.1 Legal Procedures The survey results show that 92% of the respondents across the communities did possess an IC. The highest rate of ownership was in Smor San community at 92%. Of the 92% who owned ICs, 85% possessed ICs with electronic chips. Of the respondents that possessed cards without electronic chips, 56% claimed they would apply for new ICs with electronic chips in time for the registration period of the commune elections. Of the 8% who did not have an IC, 52% said they would try to acquire one in time for the commune elections.

Table 5: IC Ownership Information

Attributes Village 23 Rolous

Cheung Ek Smor San Overall

(N=79) (N=63) (N=95) (N=237) % % % %

Do you own a Khmer Identify Card?

Yes 91.2 92.1 92.6 92.00 No 8.8 7.9 7.4 8.00 Owns IC

IC with electronic chip 93.0 84.4 79.5 85.30 IC without electronic chip 6.9 15.5 20.4 14.70 Owns IC without an electronic chip

Will apply for an IC with chip 60.0 55.5 55.5 56.25 Will not apply for an IC with chip 40.0 44.4 44.4 43.75

Does not own an IC

Will apply for an IC 42.8 40.0 71.4 52.63 Will not apply for an IC 57.1 60.0 28.8 47.37

For the 8% of respondents that do not own an IC, the three most common reasons were ‘It was burnt or lost’ (52%), ‘I don’t know how to get one’ (15%) and ‘It was damaged’ (10%). For those without ICs, 45% reported that the main reason for not owning one was due to being ‘asked to pay extra’. In Smor San community, one respondent shared that they paid an additional 10,000 riel on top of the standard 10,000 riel processing fee for a birth certificate. This was to ensure that the birth certificate was processed within a month rather than several months, or potentially not processed at all. A respondent from Rolous Cheung Ek shared a similar experience when applying for their family certificate. They were required to pay 10,000 riel in excess of the standard processing fee, which helped to guarantee their application was

2016 20

processed efficiently. In Village 23, one respondent disclosed paying an additional 50,000 riel for a birth certificate. Their application was fast-tracked and a commune officer helped with every stage of the process, even helping to complete the forms on their behalf. A consistent element across all three experiences was that the ‘extra payments’ were not solicited by the public officials, but were rather paid in order to overcome the inefficiency and maladministration of the local authorities governing these services. This issue of ‘extra payment’ when issuing documents, was further substantiated by a representative interviewed from NICFEC. They shared that through working with communities on the voter registration process, people disclosed they were often charged ‘extra’ when applying for an IC. The interviewee shared how this particularly applied to those who needed additional support when completing the application forms. Out of the 8% without ICs, 44% were in possession of another type of legal document which would allow them to apply for an IC and subsequently register to vote. The largest proportion, owned a family certificate (50%), while 45% owned a birth certificate and 4% owned another form of legal document, such as a passport.

0102030405060708090

100

I was asked topay extra

My relevantdocuments

were burnt/lost

My relevantdocuments

were damaged

I have to traveltoo far

Because ofpolitical

discrimination

45.5

27.318.2

9.00

PERC

ENTA

GE

Any particular reason for lacking these documents?

Figure 5: Any particular reason for lacking these documents?

As discussed in section ‘2.5 Demographic Information’, 41% of the respondents across the communities have migrated from the provinces to new settlements in Phnom Penh. The findings show that a small portion, 8%, of those had registered in their current community as residents, and 32% had not registered. All of the 32% that had not registered said they would not return home to register to vote. The key reason stated by 81% of the interviewees, was due to the high costs incurred when travelling home to their province.

2016 21

4.2 Knowledge on the Elections Registration Process Based on the research findings, the level of the respondents’ knowledge on the requirements to register to vote is low. The questionnaire asked each interviewee to confirm the eligibility criteria for voter participation. The respondents were able to choose multiple answers from five possible answers: choosing all five answers would equate to a complete answer. However, none of the respondents were able to provide a complete answer. Obvious criteria, such as Cambodian citizenship and being 18 years or older, were the most frequently selected answers. However a crucial requirement of living or having a residence in the community (where you will cast your vote) appears to not be widely known. An implication from this response is that migrant residents may not be aware that they are able to register to vote in communes where they are temporarily residing. Changes in the LEMNA in 2015, removed the requirement that voters had to return to their hometown to register to vote. A requirement that was often arduous for many, due to the high costs involved, in both money and time. Figure 6: What are the requirement to be able to register to votes?

0102030405060708090

100

Khmer nationalcitizen (IC)

18 years old orolder

Have ahome/residencein the communewhere they willcast their vote

Not currently injail

A person withno mental

illness or undergeneral custody

I don't know

53.9

34.1

5.0 3.9 0.7 2.4

PERC

ENTA

GE

What are the requirements to be able to register to vote?

2016 22

Table 6: Number of answers chosen for ‘What are the requirements for voter registration?’

The respondents were surveyed on two different aspects of their knowledge on voter registration, and their key sources of information for each. The first was, ‘How did you learn that you had to register to be able to vote?’ and the second, ‘How did you learn about the registration process?’ such as the stages of the process and the criteria of an eligible voter. The intention for these questions was to establish whether there was a correlation between the results and if so, to determine why. In terms of learning about having to register to be able to vote, 43% of the respondents stated the village team leader (mekrom) was their main source for this information . The village team leader is under the supervision of the village chief (mephum). The second most referred to source out of the responses was the television, at 25%, followed by the commune chief (mekhum) at 10% and the village chief (mephum) at 10% (refer to Figure 7 below). In response to ‘How did you learn about the registration process?’ 45% of the responses stated the village chief (mephum), 18% said television and 10% answered posters.

Number of answers chosen responding to ‘What are the requirements for voter

registration’ Respondents Percentage

Five answers out of five (complete answer) 0 0%

Four answers out of five 2 0.8%

Three answers out of five 32 13.5%

Two answers out of five 111 46.8%

One answer out of five 92 38.8%

Total 237 100%

43% of the respondents stated the

village team leader (mekrom) was their

main source for this information

2016 23

Figure 7: How did you learn you had to register to be able to vote?

These results reinforce the previous finding from ‘Section 3 Accessing Information’ above. Even though 85% of respondents indicated they owned a television and 48% owned a smartphone it is clear that respondents still rely on sharing information verbally, particularly on the registration process, via the village team leader and village chief. In ‘Section 3’ the majority (44%) answered that their key source of information on the commune elections in general was the village chief (mephum). A representative from the National Election Committee of Cambodia (NEC) shared during an interview that training was conducted with the commune chiefs on the registration process. The commune chiefs were then responsible for carrying out the same training to the village chiefs, prior to the registration period. A Legal Officer from COMFREL reported during an interview that they disseminate information on voter registration and elections through various channels to help raise awareness and increase voter participation. These include a daily radio programme called “Voter Education”, online videos shared on COMFREL’s Facebook and YouTube pages, and conducting roundtable discussions and workshops with commune members through provincial networks. Their outreach and awareness raising initiatives predominantly target the provincial demographic, users of social media, or radio listeners, and has not influenced to urban poor communities such as the three target communities in this report, which is quite evident in the findings discussed above. The COMFREL representative also shared that based on his observations public information and materials on the registration process disseminated by the NEC had been scarce in the month leading up to the start of the voter registration period (1 September 2016). Information on voter registration ideally should have been broadcasted on state-run television throughout August 2016, however such information was observed to only have been broadcasted in the last week of August. When interviewed about the process of disseminating information and conducting the voter registration process, the commune chief of Rolous Cheung Ek community explained that there

0102030405060708090

100

43.8

14.1 10.4 10.4 6.7 5.7 5.2 1.3 1.2 1.2 0

PERC

ENTA

GE

How did you learn you had to register to be able to vote?

2016 24

are three stages during the three-month registration period (1 September 2016 to 31 November 2016). He reported that the NEC issues a letter to all commune chiefs prior to the start of the registration period, informing them of the registration process and the different stages throughout the registration duration. The first stage is conducted over the first 20 days. The commune chief holds a separate meeting with each of the village chiefs in their commune. This is to brief them on the registration process and provide them with an official letter to share with the residents, requesting them to register for the commune election. The second stage is carried out over the subsequent 45 days, where the commune members go into the villages and establish a registration station on site for the residents. Over the final 25 days, the commune members return to the commune offices where the registration stations are transferred to and continue to operate. Simultaneously, the commune members start to submit the details of the registered voters to the NEC. The commune chief highlighted the need for and importance of community residents reporting to the commune if they required assistance with the overall process. He stated that the process of acquiring an IC takes approximately one month, before a person can even start to undergo the registration process to vote. The number of respondents who had registered to vote in a previous election was 81%. Of the respondents that had previously registered, 87% reported they had not experienced any difficulties during this registration process. The bar chart (Figure 9) below shows the frequency of the answers for those that did experience difficulties.

Figure 8: How did you learn about the registration process?

0102030405060708090

100

45.7

18.110.5 8.8 5.7 5.2 2.9 1.7 0.7 0.5 0.2 0

PERC

ENTA

GE

How did you learn about the registration process?

2016 25

0102030405060708090

100 87.1

3.6 3.6 1.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0 0

PERC

ENTA

GEIf so, did you encounter any difficulties during the registration

process?

Figure 9: Did you encounter any difficulties during the registration process?

4.3 Communities’ Awareness on Voter Participation A total of 77% of the respondents confirmed they had voted in the 2012 commune election. The national voter participation rate for the 2012 commune election was 64%, which has declined from 87% during the first commune election in 2002, and 68% in 2007.21 The key reason for non-participation in 2012 from 33% of the respondents was due to being ‘too busy’, followed by being ‘too young’ during this time for 25%, and third, for 12%, was because they were not registered to vote. The level of awareness among the respondents of the upcoming 2017 election was relatively high, at 62%. The results show the key source, for just under half of the responses (45%) was the village chief (mephum), followed by the village team leader (mekrom) at 16%, and third most common response was friends/relatives at 13%.

21 The Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (COMFREL). (2012). Final Assessment and Report on 2012 Commune Council Elections. Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Retrieved from http://www.comfrel.org/eng/components/com_mypublications/files/620271Final_Report_Commune_Elections_2012_Final_Final_06_11_2012.pdf

2016 26

Figure 10: Reason for non-participation in the previous commune election

A significant 97% of the interviewees answered ‘Yes’ to whether they would register for the forthcoming

2017 commune election. The principle reason provided for participation was the ‘need to have a good leader’ (36%), followed by the need for ‘development’ (32%), and thirdly ‘understanding the obligations

of citizens’ (17%).

Figure 11: How did you learn about the forthcoming commune election?

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

33.9

25.0

12.58.9 7.1 5.4 3.6 3.6 0 0 0 0

PERC

ENTA

GEIf no, what were the reasons for non-participation?

0102030405060708090

100

45.9

16.6 13.1 12.45.0 3.9 3.1

PERC

ENTA

GE

How did you learn about the forthcoming commune election?

2016 27

The main reason provided by the 3% that would not register for the forthcoming 2017 commune election, was because they ‘did not know’. This indicates that they had no foundation of knowledge on how to do so, and therefore would not. The second main reason was due to a ‘lack of required documents’.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Need a goodleader

For moredevelopment

I understand myobligations as a

citizen

I want toparticipate in

society

Other

36.932.1

17.5 13.5

0

PERC

ENTA

GE

If yes, what are your reasons for participation?

Figure 12: Reasons for participating in the forthcoming commune election

Figure 13: Reason for non-participation in the forthcoming commune election

0102030405060708090

100

42.828.6

14.3 14.30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0PE

RCEN

TAGE

If no, what are your reasons for non-participation?

2016 28

Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendations

5.1 Conclusion The goal of this research was to understand knowledge on voter registration and the level of ownership of legal documents required to register in three typical urban poor communities. From these communities, one can draw generalizations about other urban poor communities in Phnom Penh. Overall the research findings were very positive and encouraging for the state of democracy in Cambodia. The research found that ownership of ICs was very high amongst the urban poor communities, and as such a lack of legal identity documentation was not an issue. Furthermore, the communities were also found to have a willingness to rely on the local authorities (village chief and village team leader) to inform them of general election information and the voter registration process. These finding indicate urban poor communities are far from being apathetic or disenfranchised towards the whole election process, but rather want to be heard and want to participate in the election of their government. This is most encouraging especially as Cambodia moves toward the commune election in June 2017 and the national election in July 2018. Each finding relating to the research questions are discussed below. Research Questions: To what extent do the respondents know about the voter registration system and the documents needed to register? 77% confirmed they voted in 2012 commune election; 62% said they were aware of the

upcoming 2017 commune election, and 97% said they would register for the upcoming 2017 commune election.

However, none of the respondents were able to provide a complete answer to the requirements for voter registration. Most respondents could only name two requirements, being 18 years or older, or a being a Cambodian citizen.

Ownership of electronic devices was also found to be high across the communities (85% own a TV and 48% own a smartphone), however when it comes to accessing information on the commune election, the village chief or village team leader is relied upon as the key source for the majority of community residents.

How many respondents possess the necessary documents required to vote? 92% possess ICs and of the respondents who do not have one, 44% were in possession of

another type of legal identity document which would enable them to apply for an IC. 52% of the respondents without ICs claimed they would acquire an IC in time to register to

vote.

2016 29

Which legal documents do the respondents possess and what documents are they missing in order to register to vote? For respondents who did not have an IC, but did have another type of legal document, 50%

had a family certificate, 45% a birth certificate, and the remainder had a passport. What are the respondents’ key reasons for not owning the legal documents to vote? For the respondents who did not possess ICs or another legal document, 45% said the key

reason was due to being asked to ‘pay extra’. This highlights a possible correlation with a low level of educational attainment in urban

poor communities. The survey found that 45% have had no formal education, and of those that have, the highest proportion have not studied beyond grade 10 (32%). As reported by the respondents that were interviewed, extra payments are normally required to help complete application forms, or to overcome inefficiency. Low levels of literacy are easily exploited, which in turn contributes to the disenfranchisement of urban poor communities from participating in voting.

5.2 Recommendations The Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) is well aware of the trend in Cambodia’s falling voter participation rate, together with the country’s previous voter registration system, which had been continually plagued by allegations of fraud. Therefore, the introduction of the new biometric voter registration system for the upcoming commune election is a welcome and timely measure of change. As the findings of this research have revealed, Cambodia’s urban poor are eager to participate and to cast their votes in the upcoming elections, therefore the integrity of the new voter registration system is vitally important to free and fair elections in Cambodia.

The high willingness of voters to participate in the upcoming elections means voter registration is the first and most crucial phase of the election process. The NEC and RGC need to address the reported technical problems and delays experienced during the implementation of the new biometric voter registration system and ensure all willing and eligible voters are given the opportunity to register themselves.

Communities continue to rely on direct contact with local authorities to be informed on

election related issues. The NEC and RGC need to ensure that local authorities are properly trained and adequately supported in their role of information dissemination on the election process. More information needs to be publically disseminated, over a longer period of time leading up to the registration period as well, which will help to support the role of the local authorities with informing the community’s residents.

The previous paper voter registration system was overhauled in order to ensure the full

participation of all of Cambodia’s estimated 9 million eligible voters. Further research needs to be undertaking to review voter participation rates (particularly in urban poor communities) under the new biometric voter registration system, to determine if falling participation rates can be reversed.

2016 30

Community’s knowledge on commune election

Research Objectives:

To review whether urban poor community members in Phnom Penh possess legal documents to allow them to register for the upcoming commune elections;

To examine the urban poor community members’ knowledge of the documents required to allow them to register for the upcoming commune elections;

To examine the urban poor community members’ knowledge of how to register for the upcoming commune elections.

Annexes Annex 1: Household Survey Questionnaire

Household Survey Questionnaire Questionnaire Code: /__/__

Name of team leader: _______________ Name of Interviewer: __________________ Date of Interview: _________________________ Location: Village: __________ Sangkat: __________ Khan: ___________ Respondent’s Phone number: ________________ Name of respondent:________________

SECTION 1: Demographic Information

01 Age of respondent ____________Years 02 Gender 1. Male 2. Female

03 What is your marital status? SA

1. Single 2. Married 3. Divorced/ Separated 4. Widow/Widower 5. Others:

___________

04 Are you a migrant? 1. Yes 2. No (Skip to Q 7)

05 If yes, which province are you from?

Province’s name_____________ 06 Which year did you first move to where you

currently live? Year _________________

07 What is your last educational level? ____________________Years

08 How many people live in your household in Phnom Penh?

8.1 Male___person(s)

8.2 Female___person(s)

2016 31

09 How many dependent members

does your household have? _________________________person(s)

10

What is your current primary job? SA 1. Laborer

(garment, construction)

2. Self-employed 3. Gov’t staff 4. Student

5. Company staff 6. NGOs staff 7. Stay at home 8. Others

SECTION 2: Owning Property Related to Accessing Information 11 Do you own a Television? 1. No 2. Yes

12 Do you own a Radio? 1. No 2. Yes

13 Do you own a smart phone? 1. No 2. Yes

14

What type of media/sources of information do you access? MA

1. Facebook 2. Radio 3. Television

4. Neighbor/community

5. Family/friend 6. Newsletter/poster

7. Other

15

Where do you get your information about the commune elections from? MA

1. Facebook 2. Radio 3. Television 4.

Neighbor/community

5. Family/friend 6. Newsletter/poster

7. Village

Chief

8. Other

SECTION 3: Legal Procedures 16 Do you have a Cambodian Identity Card? 1. Yes 2. No (Skip to Q18)

17 What type of Identity card do you have?

1. Card with electronic chip 2. Card without electronic chip

18

Why don’t you have an Identity Card? SA 1. I don’t think I need one 2. I don’t have the documentation needed

3. I can’t afford it 4. I don’t know how to get one

5. It was damaged 5. It was burnt/lost

7. Other (please specify)

19 Will you try to get an ID card before the voter registration period? 1. Yes 2. No

2016 32

21

Any particular reason for lacking these documents? SA 1. I was asked to pay extra

2. I have to travel too far away

3. Because of political discrimination

4. relevant documents were damaged

5. relevant documents were burnt/lost

6. Other_____________

SECTION 4: Voter’s Knowledge on the Election Registration Process

4.1 Registration Process

25

What are the requirements to be able to register to vote? MA

1. 18 years old or older 2. Khmer national citizen (IC)

3. have a home/residence in the commune where they will cast their vote

4. person who has no mental illness or under general custody

5. Not currently in jail 6. I don’t know

26 How did you learn that you had to register to be able to vote? MA

20

What legal documents do you currently possess? SA 1. Birth certificate 2. Family Book 3. Residence certificate

4. Other_________________

22

If you are originally from the provinces, have you registered with your new settlement as a resident?

1. Yes 0. No

23

If yes, which level? MA 1. Municipality 2. Khan 3. Sangkat

4. Village 5. Krom 6. Others____________

24

If no, do you plan to return to your home province to register to vote in the communal elections? MA

If not, why not?

1. Cost too much

2. Cannot leave work 3. Cannot leave family

2016 33

1. Poster 2. Registration office

3. Party official 4. TV

5. Friends/relatives 6. Radio 7. Mekhum 8. Mekrom

9. Mephum 10. Loud speaker 11. Other

27

How did you learn about the registration process? MA

1. Loud speaker 2. Radio 3. Poster 4. NGO reading materials

5. School teacher

6. NGOs member info

7. TV 8. Registration official

9. Friends/relatives

10. Mekhum 11.Mephum

12. Mekrom

28 Have you previously registered to vote in a previous

election?

1. Yes

2. No (Skip to q 30)

29

If so, did you encounter any difficulties during the registration process?

1. Extra payment required

2. Unclear information

3. Change in Location

4. Time change

5. Impolite

treatment

6. Problem my documents

7. Technical defects 8. Waited too long

9. Illness 10. Expensive and too far to travel

11. Other______________

30

What is the process for registering to vote?

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

4.2: Voter Awareness

31 Did you vote in the commune election 2012? 1. Yes

(Skip to 33)

2. No

If no, reasons for non-participation: MA

2016 34

32 1. too young 2. too busy 3. too

frightened 4. too far away

5. did not know how

6. not registered 7. lose the name

8. did not know the location

9. difficult to find my name on the voting list

10. lacked the required document

11. name was already used to vote

12. Other______

33 Have you heard that the commune elections would be held in 2017?

1. Yes 0. No

34

How did you learn about the forthcoming commune election? MA 1. Party official

2. newspaper 3. Mekrom 4. Mephum

5. Mekhum 6. Radio 7. friends /relatives

35 Will you register to vote in the forthcoming commune election in 2017? 1. Yes 0. No

36

If yes, reason for participation? MA 1. Understand my obligations as a citizen

2. For more development

3. need a good leader

4. I want to participate in society

5. other_________________

If no, reason for non-participation? MA

37

6. Not interested in politics

7. my vote doesn’t

make a difference 8. I don’t know

enough about politics 9. too frightened 10. too far away 11. too busy

12. did not know 13. not registered 14. lack the required

documents 15. my name is not on the voter list

16. Lack of information about how (where, when, how to vote?).

17. No money to travel

2016 35

Annex 2: Key Informant Interview (KII) Checklists

Checklist 1: Key Informants with the Commune Chief from Rolous Cheung Ek Community 1. Do the local authorities use any other additional tools or approaches to disseminate

information on the commune election and registration process? 2. What other opportunities are there for the community members to ask the local authorities

/ (such as village meetings, community groups etc.) about the process on registering to vote?

3. Our findings show that some of the respondents have reported they have had to pay extra money to receive their ID cards. Do you have any comments on this issue? What measures are being taken to prevent this from happening and/or to help people report this issue?

4. Are the local authorities engaging with CSOs to help disseminate information to the urban poor communities on the commune elections?

5. Will any direct assistance be provided to people without ICs, to help them acquire the cards in the 3 month period? Will there be any follow up engagements with urban poor communities, to support with the registration of the ICs?

6. How does the mephum disseminate information to the community residents? 7. From your experience, what are the reasons some people still do not register, even after the

mephum has engaged them and disseminated information? 8. Is it the mephum’s responsibility to make sure their village understands the registration and

voting procedure, or the community members? 9. How do they (the mephum and community members) make sure the communities

understand the information disseminated?

Checklist 2: Key Informants with the Neutral and Impartial Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (NICFEC)

1. Do the local authorities use any other additional tools or approaches to disseminate information on the commune election and registration process?

2. What other opportunities are there for the community members to ask the local authorities / (such as village meetings, community groups etc.) about the process on registering to vote?

3. Our findings show that some of the respondents have reported they have had to pay extra money to receive their ID cards. Do you have any comments on this issue? What measures are being taken to prevent this from happening and/or to help people report this issue?

4. Are the local authorities engaging with CSOs to help disseminate information to the urban poor communities on the commune elections?

5. Will any direct assistance be provided to people without ICs, to help them acquire the cards in the 3 month period? Will there be any follow up engagements with urban poor communities, to support with the registration of the ICs?

6. Please can you share what kind of workshops and training you have conducted with the local communities, to help mobilize them with disseminating information on registration?

7. What benefits or improvements have you seen among the communities after they have participated in such initiatives?

2016 36

Checklist 3: Key Informants with the Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia (COMFREL)

1. Do the local authorities use any other additional tools or approaches to disseminate information on the commune election and registration process?

2. What other opportunities are there for the community members to ask the local authorities / (such as village meetings, community groups etc.) about the process on registering to vote?

3. Our findings show that some of the respondents have reported they have had to pay extra money to receive their ID cards. Do you have any comments on this issue? What measures are being taken to prevent this from happening and/or to help people report this issue?

4. Are the local authorities engaging with CSOs to help disseminate information to the urban poor communities on the commune elections?

5. Will any direct assistance be provided to people without ICs, to help them acquire the cards in the 3 month period? Will there be any follow up engagements with urban poor communities, to support with the registration of the ICs?

Checklist 4: Key Informants with the National Election Committee of Cambodia (NEC)

1. Do the local authorities use any other additional tools or approaches to disseminate information on the commune election and registration process?

2. What other opportunities are there for the community members to ask the local authorities / (such as village meetings, community groups etc.) about the process on registering to vote?

3. Our findings show that some of the respondents have reported they have had to pay extra money to receive their ID cards. Do you have any comments on this issue? What measures are being taken to prevent this from happening and/or to help people report this issue?

4. Are the local authorities engaging with CSOs to help disseminate information to the urban poor communities on the commune elections?

5. Will any direct assistance be provided to people without ICs, to help them acquire the cards in the 3 month period? Will there be any follow up engagements with urban poor communities, to support with the registration of the ICs?

2016 37

Annex 3: Letter for Interview Request

2016 38

2016 39

2016 40

2016 41