Transparency and Credibility of the Electoral Law 140. The CSAR observes that the Electoral Law - Proclamation No.111/1995, and the amended Proclamation No. 532/2007 - are directed towards ensuring transparent electoral processes in Ethiopia. In addition, the report points out that, under Proclamation No. 532/2007 “public observers” can observe the electoral process at the wereda and kebele election offices, and at polling stations. The National Election Board (NEBE) 141. The CSAR notes that the National Election Board, “independent of any influence,” is established by Article 102 of the Ethiopian Constitution to conduct free and fair elections in an impartial manner, under particulars determined by law. The report also notes that Proclamation No.532/2007 provides for nine members, appointed by the House of Peoples’ Representatives (HoPR), upon the recommendation of the Prime Minister, with consideration given to national contribution and gender representation. At least one member shall be a lawyer. According to the report, NEBE members each serve a five-year term, renewable for one additional term. In nominating NEBE members, the Prime Minister is required by Article 6(2) to hold sufficient consultations with the Forum for Political Organisations made up of parties holding seats in the House of Peoples’ Representatives, “to ascertain that the nominees are independent and impartial.” 142. According to the CSAR, the Board is accountable to the HoPR which may terminate the term of a member: if he resigns for personal reasons; or if the HoPR believes that the Board member is unable to properly carry out his duties, due to illness; or the Board member has committed serious misconduct. 143. The CSAR points out that, although three of the nine members now serving on the 2009 Board, were nominated by opposition parties, controversy trails Board nomination and appointment processes. Elaborating upon this observation, the report points out that while some opposition parties argued that granting the Prime Minister the power to nominate Board members would not guarantee the neutrality of the nominees, the ruling party countered with the argument that nominees were non-partisan individuals selected on the basis of their professional capacity. According to the report, the neutrality issue was also related to the selection of officers to the lower structures of the Board, with some opposition parties holding that such officials were mainly ruling party supporters. 144. Describing the process for adjudicating election-related disputes, the CSAR notes that Articles 92-96 of Proclamation No. 532/2007 provides for mechanisms - 82 -