Election authority brochure presents EU vote in one-sided terms

A 16 page information booklet distributed to every household about Iceland’s 29 August referendum contains errors, oversimplifications and omissions, according to mbl.is. Despite several qualifications, the publication presents the consequences of voting yes or no in a way that largely favours one side, the report says.

The booklet was issued by the National Electoral Commission to explain the referendum on whether Iceland should resume membership negotiations with the European Union. The commission had a difficult and sensitive task, as nearly every aspect of the issue has been disputed, including the status of Iceland’s 2009 application, the nature of the 2010 negotiations, the objectives for a possible agreement and the constitutional handling of such an agreement.

The text was prepared by the University of Iceland’s Institute of Law, but the National Electoral Commission has confirmed to Morgunbladid that it bears final responsibility for the booklet. The commission said the institute handled the editing and that the final draft was submitted to the commission on 20 July. No comments were made on the draft, it said.

Asked what specific measures had been taken to follow recommendations from the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission that voters should understand the consequences of both choices, the commission said only that it had commissioned the Institute of Law and that the institute had followed the recommendations in its work.

The booklet contains useful information and improves on some points made in the National Electoral Commission’s initial online presentation. It no longer states that uncertain voters should preferably vote yes. It also says that the referendum is advisory, that a second referendum on a membership agreement is not required by law, and that the cost and duration of negotiations are uncertain.

However, the booklet’s main message remains that a yes vote would start negotiations, while a no vote would prevent them from starting. It also says that a yes vote would eventually give the public a membership agreement for a final decision. The report notes that this outcome is not certain, based on the booklet’s small print, other official sources, and statements and responses from ministers.

Parliamentary resolution leaves key issues open

The referendum is based on a parliamentary resolution passed by Iceland’s parliament. It sets the date and asks: “Should Iceland resume membership negotiations with the European Union?”

However, the resolution does not set negotiating objectives, determine how the negotiations should be conducted, require a later referendum, or specify what would happen to the application if a majority votes no.

This differs from the 2009 parliamentary resolution, which instructed the government to submit an application and specifically required a membership agreement to be put to a public vote. The current resolution contains no equivalent provision.

The National Electoral Commission therefore draws its description of what would happen next from the minister’s explanatory memorandum, the majority opinion of a parliamentary committee and statements from the government. The booklet does not sufficiently distinguish between what parliament approved, what the committee stated and what ministers have announced, according to the report.