COMMITTEE OF VOTERS OF UKRAINE FINAL MONITORING REPORT ON RESULTS OF 2012 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS All-Ukrainian civic organisation “Committee of voters of Ukraine” (CVU) operates since 1994 an d hold m o n i t o r i n g of election campaigns i n Ukraine. CVU branches work i n all re g i on s o f t h e countr y. Committee of voters of Ukraine is on e of t h e
m e m b e rs of European Network o f
Election Monitoring Organizations (ENEMO). I n May-October 2012 CVU held long-ter m m o n i t o r i n g
of every stage of p re p a ra t i o n a n d
conduction of election campaign o n re g u l a r elections of t h e people's deputies of Ukraine i n all t h e districts. O n t h e Election Day of October 28 th 6,500 CVU observers worked o n election precin cts. The given re p o r t was p r e p a r e d based o n resu lts of lon g - a n d short ter m observation of t h e Committee of voters of Ukraine.
CONCLUSIONS The 2012 elections of the people's deputies of Ukraine as a whole with violations of fair and democratic elections' standards. They became the most problematic national elections since 2004. The most problematic stages of the election process were as follows:
pre-election campaigning, accompanied by bribery and use of administrative resource; formation of election commissions; establishment of the voting results in single-mandate constituencies.
However, the problems were also recorded another stages of election process as well as before its official beginning. The legal basis made it possible to conduct fair and transparent elections, though had a number of important drawbacks. The regular elections of the people's deputies of Ukraine were conducted again on the basis of a Law, passed by the parliament less then a year before elections. Ruling of some of the Law provisions unconstitutional,
adoption of a Law “On Peculiarities of Ensuring Openness, Transparency and Democratic Elections of People's deputies of Ukraine on October 28, 2012” less then a month before election process beginning, as well as revision of some important election rules (such as provisions on lotting for the candidacies for district and precinct election commissions, procedures for change of voting place without change of voting address etc) did not contribute to the principle of election legislation stability. The Law on Election of People's Deputies of Ukraine did not take into account the majority of recommendations by the Venice Commission, OSCE/ODIHR and other international organisations, done based on previous elections results, as well as analysis of Election of People's Deputies of Ukraine draft law on the stage of it's preparation by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine. In particular, recommendations that covered the following issues were not taken into account: determination of criteria for election districts formation; limitation of possibilities for change of election commission member by other persons from the same subject of election process; regulation of pre-election campaigning; rise of election campaign financing transparency level; ground for declaring voting and election results invalid. Non-consideration of these recommendations, as well as other drawbacks and lacunas in the Law caused a number of problems in its application. Some of these problems are lack of some parties and candidates' representation in the election commissions, abuse of administrative resource, frequent changes in the composition of DEC and PEC, violations of voting results establishment in single-mandate districts. The key role in administration of the election process was played by CEC, while other state institutions were rather passive in providing elections correspondence with international standards. However, collegial nature and transparency in the work of the Commission was weakened by the practice of preliminary discussions of issues in the competence of the Commission on closed meetings, as well as practice of CEC members' territorial specialisation for preparation of some issues for consideration of the Commission. Local public authorities in many cases have done necessary steps or proper organisation of the election process, though on a nationwide scale activities of these bodies lacked systematic nature and single approach to the piorities for provision of proper election process organisation. CVU records passivity of law-enforcement bodies (Ministry of Internal Affairs, Security Service of Ukraine, Prosecutor General's Office of Ukraine) in reacting on information on violations, as well as instances of illegal interference in the election process, especially during the vote tabulation. Formation of election districts was done without public consultations with potentially interested subjects. In some cases a principle of election districts continuity of boundaries was violated with no good reason, in some cases districts were formed without consideration of administrative territorial devision of Ukraine (in 6 cases even territories of village councils were divided between several districts), as well as places of national minorities' compact residence.
Configuration of some districts was favourable for some candidates' balloting, who started campaigning long before the election process beginning. Such situation casts doubt on the lack of political influence on the districts formation. Considerable number of problems connected with formation of election precincts was caused by the drawbacks of the Law on Election of People's Deputies of Ukraine. The CEC has limited a list of special election precincts formed on permanent basis, against the Law. As a result of the Law drawbacks and an order of special election precincts formation on permanent basis in places of temporary voters' stay approved by CEC, in some places of citizens' temporary stay temporary precincts were not formed at all, while in some other places of temporary stay there were not enough reasons to form the precincts (in particular, in sanatoriums, children's hospitals etc). The list of special precincts on permanent basis was several times changed by CEC that may have complicated organisation of voting. Nomination of candidates was not enough transparent and was followed by inter-party and inner party conflicts, positioning of politically affiliated candidates as independent. Nomination of candidates-”clones” in single-mandate districts was rather wide spread, such candidates had to distract part of votes in support of main candidates. Registering of deputies was done by CEC in the time according to the Law on Election of People's Deputies of Ukraine. As a whole, no considerable violations of election legislation were recorded in the process of candidates' registration. The main problem on the stage of candidates' registration was questionable reading of the Law on Election of People's Deputies of Ukraine in the part of the term of permanent residence on the territory of Ukraine as a ground for realisation of passive election right. The grounds were understood by CEC rather broadly, and there were many cases of denial in candidates' registration. However, potential election subjects had enough possibilities to protect their right for registration in court. One of the important problem of 2012 parliamentary elections became removal of some opposition leader from participation in election contest. Cases of mass candidates' resignations, as well as one of the parties cancellation of a decision of its candidates nomination which took place in September- October 2012 had negative effect on the organisation of the elections. Cancellation of candidates' registration on the above mentioned grounds has led to the necessity to reprint election ballots for many districts, as well as use of “Withdrawn” stamp for introduction of changes to the ballot papers. The Law and the CEC procedures drawbacks for lotting of the candidates to precinct and district commission has resulted in a number of problems in PEC and DEC formation, in particular excessive representation of not well known parties or parties which nominated candidates in several single-mandate districts only in the commissions, lack of representation in the commissions of parties and candidates with high chances to be elected, inclusion to the commissions of persons without proper experience in organisation of the election process, frequent changes in the composition of the commissions (including changes just before E-Day and after the voting). Formation of PEC was accompanied with multiple cases of violations — on purpose prevention of some electoral subjects from nomination of candidates to the PEC composition, violation of deadlines for lotting and PEC formation, conduction of lotting in
a way that made it possible to pick certain pre-selected candidates etc. Some of these problems were caused by the fact that CEC has changes the order of lotting on the PEC composition shortly before the lotting. As a whole, proper conditions for work of DEC were provided almost in all regions, while in some cases commissions were not provided with proper premises, office equipment etc. At the same time, proper conditions for work of PEC were not provided in many cases. Most DEC were transparent in their activities, while PEC demonstrated to some extent lower level of transparency. Both DEC and PEC were not effective enough in considering complaints of election process subjects. At the same time, noneffectiveness of complaints consideration was in many cases caused by inappropriate level of headquarters' lawyers, candidates, authorised persons and proxies to contest decisions, activities on inactivity regarding elections in the election commissions. In some regions ofﬁcial observers have faced problems with registration by DEC. Among main problems connected with formation and correction of voter lists should be named low level of preliminary and corrected voter lists in many precincts, violation of deadlines for submission of preliminary voter lists from State Voter Register bodies to PEC, drawbacks in organisation of State Voter Register bodies work. Change of the order of temporary change of voting place without change of voting address by CEC has prevented mass migration of voters on the E-Day. However, correspondence of the new order with the requirements of the Law on State Voter Register and Constitution of Ukraine is rather questionable. The Committee of voters of Ukraine has revealed a number of important problems in the practice of pre-election campaigning by the election process subjects. The main problems are as following:
start of campaigning long before the election process beginning; початок здійснення агітації задовго до початку виборчого процесу; lack of content of campaigning materials/political advertisement of many election subjects; wide spread in mass media hidden political advertisements (so called “jeans”); frequent cases of prevention from campaigning (damage of advertisement posters, refusal from providing premises for campaigning events); use of so called “black PR” technology; mass direct and indirect vote buying; active excessive use of administration resource and involvement od state officials in campaigning activities.
CVU has also registered non-systematic but not sporadic cases of pressure on candidates and their business, which had some indicators of being politically motivated. Voting as a whole was held with no serious violations, though in such violations were recorded in some districts.
The following problematic aspects of voting on certain polling stations should be emphasised:
wrong application of “Withdrawn” stamp on ballot papers; prevention of observers from their activities on some polling stations; lack of explanation of voting procedure; drawbacks in the organisation of video surveillance; violations in the order of passing ballot papers to voters; excessive number of voters in the exerpt from the voter list for voting at voter's place of stay; campaigning on the E-Day.
CVU observers have also recorded not rare cases of vote buying and other violations (including use of so called merry-go-round, photographing of ballot papers in the booths for secret voting, use of vanishing writing ink for filling in ballot papers etc). One of the most problematic stages of the election process of the regular elections of people's deputies of Ukraine was vote tabulation and establishment of voting results. Numerous abuses became one of the reasons is was impossible to establish verifiable results in five single-mandate districts, though a list of “problematic” singlemandate districts is not limited to the ones where it was impossible to establish election results. In many cases PEC held vote tabulation with violation of the Law requirements, rules of election documentation transporting were also frequently not observed. Work of most PEC on receiving election documentation was not organised properly. In the process of election results establishment in some districts cases of incorrect data introduction to the “Elections” system, as well as selective re-tabulation of ballots, intentional damage of ballots, violence, threatening, interference in election commissions' work. RECOMMENDATIONS Institutions of state authories should scrupulously consider 2012 elections experience in order to eliminate drawbacks in election process organisation before conduction of repeat and interim elections of people's deputies of Ukraine, and also 2015 presidential elections. Based on results of corresponding analysis shortly after establishment of results of elections of people's deputies of Ukraine changes should be introduced to the law on elections of people's deputies of Ukraine. Persons, guilty for violation of election legislation should be brought to justice. Before 2015 presidential elections conduction electoral legislation should be codified. Besides, election system should be revised for parliamentary elections with consideration of recommendations of Council of Europe and Venice Commission. І. To Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine: The following changes should be introduced to the Law On Elections of People's deputies of Ukraine or another law that would establish the order of people's deputies of Ukraine elections:
in the part of territorial organisation of elections:
establish reasons for change of electoral districts boundaries in a
period before the beginning of election process; provide principle of election districts continuity of boundaries (with possible excuse of this principle in the cases when it is caused by peculiarities of administrative and territorial devision of Ukraine), consideration of administrative and territorial devision, and also places of national minorities residence; provide obligation of preliminary publication of CEC draft decisions on formation or change of election districts boundaries or centers, and also consultations on corresponding issues with parties and other potentially interested subjects; establish an order for formation, change and liquidation of permanent election precincts; establish clear list of special election precincts that may be formed on temporary basis; consider possibility to form out of country election precincts out of diplomatic institutions or military bazes abroad and also establish an order of their formation; decrease maximum number of voters per election precinct to ď‚§
provide proper organisation of voting and vote tabulation; in the part of formation and organisation of election commissions' work: make clear division between parties-subjects of election process, providing that if a party nominates candidates in single-mandate constituencies such a party may nominate candidates to the commissions of those districts only where their candidates are registered, while representation in composition of all PEC should be granted only to parties which nominate candidates in mationwide election district; establish general provisions for lotting for candidates in DEC and PEC members, providing separate lotting for each DEC and PEC; consider possibility to give rights to candidates in single-mandate constituencies to nominate candidates in DEC members; provide obligation of passing training on election legislation at least by all DEC members (or candidates in DEC members), and if possible â€” by PEC members as well, and establish an order of such training conduction; cosider possibility to deny parties and candidates right to change voluntarily members of commissions by other persons from the same subjects of candidates' nomination to the commission composition; consider possibility to decrease number of PEC members in case of decrease of maximum number of voters for election precincts; establish a range of DEC decisions that are subject for obligatory
publication on the CEC web site; in the part of nomination and registration of candidates in deputies:
specify meaning of temporary residence on the territory of Ukraine
for the last 5 years; clearly foresee that submission of documents for registration with insufficient information required by the law are grounds for denial in candidates registration; establish such a term for candidates or parties to decide on resignation form participation in elections (cancellation of candidate's registration in nationwide district) that would make it possible to reprint ballot papers without use of “Withdrawn” stamp; limit grounds for giving notices to parties and candidates, but
provide proportional and effective sanctions for the most substantial violations (indirect vote-buying, use of subordinate persons in campaigning etc), such as fines; in the part of registering og voters, formation and correction of voter list: establish such an order of voting at out of country election precincts that would correspond with the principle of equal election right; provide for mechanisms that would let voters freely change place of voting without change of voting address in the boundaries of nationwide election district and temporary change place of voting without change of voting address in the boundaries on single-mandate election district only; introduce effective mechanisms of public control over change of place of voting without change of voting address such as those used for control over voting with absentee voting certificates; establish DEC power in control over formation and correction of voter lists; provide possibility for voters to file applications on correction of voter lists solely to bodies of State Voter Register maintenance, not to PEC; establish such time frames for consideration of disputes connected
with correction of voter lists that would allow not making any changes to the corrected voter lists on the E-Day (besides from technical mistakes); in the part of pre-election campaigning regulation: unify rules of parties financing of election campaign, taking into account recommendations of the Venice Commission, OSCE/ODIHR, Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, Group of Countries against Corruption on bringing regulation of financing parties and elections in correspondence with international standards; make more clear division between election campaigning and official information on activities of state authorities who are candidates on elections; establish an order for placement of outdoor political advertising with consideration of requirements of providing equal opportunities in campaigning for electoral process subjects for placement of campaigning materials in printed and audiovisual mass media outlets;
consider possibility to change limits for election campaigning with
consideration of OSCE/ODIHR preliminary recommendations based on election observation results, in particular — limits in campaigning in mass media with foreign share in ownership, prohibition for foreigners ot participate in campaigning etc; limit range of grounds for cancellation of license for translation and issue of printed editions to the most substantial violations (such violations should be clearly stated in the law), providing possibility of other sanctions to mass media, such as fines; bring regulation of right for answer in correspondence with democratic standards, providing grounds for refusal; introduce more effective mechanisms of preventing state officials
from involvement in campaigning activities and indirect vote buying, in particular by establishing effective and proportional sanctions for corresponding violations; in the part of organisation of voting, vote tabulation and establishment of election results: consider possibility to simplify regulation of an order of preparation for voting, organisation of voting and vote tabulation on election precincts with simultaneous preservation of mechanisms aimed at prevention from possible abuses/violations; provide such a order of ballot papers print that would let reprinting them in short term without introduction of changes to the ballots by “Withdrawn” stamp, with simultaneous provision of ballots protection from forgery; provide for publication of documentation connected with ballot papers (acts etc) on the CEC web site; provide for possibility to print ballot papers in the languages of national minorities in places of compact residence; provide that information posters of election process subjects placed at precincts do not belong to campaigning materials; consider possibility to add to the Law provisions that would provide possibility for observers and other persons who have a right to be present at commission meetings without invitation or permission to enter the voting premises after closing of election precinct; change a range of reasons for declaring voting results at election precinct invalid with consideration of preliminary recommendations of Venice Commission and OSCE/ODIHR; provide possibility to cancel election results in case of violations
which make it impossible to establish verifiable election results; in the part of status of ofﬁcial observers, authorised persons and proxies: provide an obligation to register authorised persons and proxies in the districts by DEC;
provide an opportunity for observers from civic organisations to
monitor elections nationwide, and not only in the limits of one or another single-mandate district, and also their registration on early stages of election process; in the part of appealing of decisions, actions or passivity regarding elections and responsibility for election legislation violation: consider possibility to prolong time frames of appeals consideration by election commissions to 3-5 days; consider possibility to further narrow competences of election commission in consideration of election disputes, and in case of preservation of the current mechanism of commissions formation in future — limiting consideration of election disputes to the competences of courts; provide possibility to appeal all court decisions on election disputes, including decisions of Higher Administrative Court of Ukraine; provide effective and proportional sanctions for violation of all restrictions and prohibitions imposed by the Law, including by introducing correspondent changes in the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses and Criminal Code of Ukraine.
ІІ. To the president of Ukraine and Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine:
to consider possibility to assume measures within the limits of their authority aimed at bringing to justice state officials who violated electoral legislation, including participation in campaigning activities; to consider possibility to assume measures aimed at further reform of election legislation with due consideration of 2012 election campaign and provision of its codification, i.e. by establishment of a new Working group on reforming election legislation; to consider possibility to adopt before regular elections an act (acts) that would establish standards of activities of members of Cabinet and heads of other executive authorities institutions on preparations for elections.
ІІІ. To Prosecutor General's Ofﬁce of Ukraine and Ministry of Internal Affairs:
to consider possibility to assume measures within the limits of their authority aimed at bringing to justice all persons who violated electoral legislation; to publish information on results of court hearings on the cases of administrative violations and criminal cases; to assume measures aimed at raising level of skills and knowledge of prosecutors and internal affairs bodies officials on election legislation issues, protection of voting rights, reacting on violations etc.
ІV. To Central Election Commission:
to consider possibility to prepare, publish and publicly discuss report on the CEC activities in organisation of the regular elections of the people's deputies of Ukraine, revealed problems and ways to eliminate them; based on the results of regular elections of the people's deputies of Ukraine to consider possibility to develop propositions on further improvement of Ukrainian
electoral legislation, in particular provisions regarding election districts boundaries, order or election commission training etc; to consider possibility to form permanent center or branch of CEC Secretariat that would be responsible for training of election commission members; to consider possibility of preliminary publication of CEC acts on electoral matters on the CEC website for public awareness and also consulting on such drafts; to consider possibility to form territorial Secretariat departments to decrease functional pressure on the Commission and its central body; to consider possibility to change the practice of the Commission and its members' work to make it more transparent in consideration and ruling of issues of its competence, as well as to refuse from CEC members territorial specialisation in preliminary consideration of issues, belonging to the CEC competence.
1. TERRITORIAL ORGANIZATION OF THE ELECTIONS OF PEOPLE S DEPUTIES OF UKRAINE Formationof the electoral districts The Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” only outlines the order of formation of electoral districts. In particular, it makes provision that the CEC should form electoral districts in 180 days before the election day (Pgh. 3, i. 6 of the final and transitional regulations of the Law). In addition, Art. 18 of the Law provides that the districts should exist on a regular basis; the boundaries of the districts should not violate the boundaries of the oblasts, cities of Kyiv and Sevastopol, and Autonomous Republic of Crimea; the deviation of the voters number in a single mandate electoral district should not exceed 12% of the estimated average number of voters in single mandate electoral districts determined by the CEC based on data of the State Voters Register (Art. 18 of the Law).However, the Law is not reflecting some important principles for the formation of the districts, in particular, the principle of continuity of the districts’ boundaries; considering during their formation the boundaries of city districts and cities of the oblast importance, places of compact residence of national minorities and others. In this context it is worth noting that the Law does not provide for public consultation in determining electoral boundaries, as well as the grounds and procedure for revision of electoral districts’ boundaries. If the following (after 2012) Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine are to be held after the mixed electoral system, there is a high risk that the districts’ boundaries, formed in 2012, will be significantly changed shortly before the election process of the respective elections. And so the winners of the election campaign of 2012, actively interacting with voters of “their” districts, will find themselves in an inconvenient position because of a new redistribution of administrative-territorial units between the districts. The CEC determined the number of single mandate districts for each region in Resolution №65 of April 9, 2012. This number, generally, was proportional to the number of voters included in the State Voters Register at the adoption date of the mentioned Resolution of the CEC. Boundaries and centers of the districts were defined in the CEC’s Resolution №82 of April 28, 2012. The draft of this Resolution was not given open publicity, and respectively, potential participants of the electoral process and experts were not able to affect its final content. Moreover, the very Resolution №82 was censored twice a few months before the election day (the CEC Resolutions №№ 130 of July 31, 2012 and 1072 of September 25, 2012), which could somewhat complicate the agitation and organization of the electoral process in the respective single mandate districts.The significant gaps in the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”
concerning formation of electoral districts became one of the main reasons that caused a number of important drawbacks during the formation of the districts: Violationof the principle of boundaries continuity of the districts In many regions, the CEC created districts with continuous borders. Among these regions are Volyn, Zhytomyr, Zaporizhia, Ivano-Frankivsk, Kirovohrad, Mykolaiv, Poltava, Rivne, Sumy, Ternopil, Khmelnytsky and Chernivtsi oblasts. However, in other oblasts, and also in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, Kyiv and Sevastopol, this principle has been violated, which led to appearance of natural and artificial enclaves in some of the districts. Besides that, in 2012, the number of regions in which districts were formed with violation of the principle of their boundaries continuity significantly increased compared with 2002. For example, in 2002, none of the districts within Vinnitsa, Odessa, Kharkiv, Cherkasy, Chernihiv oblasts and Kyiv was divided into several parts by the territory of the other districts. However, during the formation of the districts in these regions in 2012 the principle of boundaries continuity of the districts was not complied. Table 1. Adherence to the principle of boundaries continuity of the districts in 2002 and 2012 Region 2002 Autonomou s Republic of Crimea Vinnytsia + oblast
Dnipropetriv sk oblast Donetsk oblast Zhytomyr oblast Zakarpattia oblast Zaporizhia oblast IvanoFrankivsk oblast Kyiv oblast Kirovohrad oblast Luhansk oblast
Odessa oblast Poltava oblast Rivne oblast Sumy oblast Ternopil oblast Kharkiv oblast Kherson oblast Khmelnyts ky oblast Cherkasy oblast Chernivtsi oblast Chernihiv oblast
Notes: "+" - the principle of boundaries continuity of the districts was complied; "-" - the principle was violated. Gray color marks the differences between the regions. _______________________________ Compared with 2002, the number of districts that were divided into several parts artificially, without any grounds, has increased (from 8 to 23):- The territory of the electoral district №12, formed in Vinnytsia oblast, was divided into 4 parts, disconnected from each other with the territory of the electoral district №11. This division is artificial, since all the electoral districts formed within the oblast in 2001 had continuous boundaries; - While forming districts for the 2002 elections within Dnipropetrivsk oblast no district was divided into several parts artificially. All the enclaves that existed in the districts of the oblast had natural origin, as they were determined by the peculiarities of the administrative-territorial structure of the oblast. For the 2012 elections, the CEC artificially divided 3 districts within the oblast into several parts - districts №№27, 34, and 36; - In 2001, during the formation of districts within Donetsk oblast only the district №50 was artificially divided into several parts, while the rest of the districts remained continuous due to the peculiarities of the administrative-territorial structure of the oblast. In 2012, the number of districts artificially divided into several parts within the same oblast increased to 5 (districts №№ 50, 52, 53, 55, and 56); - During the formation of the districts in Zakarpattia oblast in 2001 boundaries of only two districts (№ № 71 and 72) were artificially disrupted. In 2012, the number of such districts increased to 3 (districts №№ 69, 72, and 73); - In 2002, within Kyiv oblast none of the districts was artificially divided into several parts. However, in 2012, without any justification districts №№91 and 93 were artificially divided into several parts; - In 2002, only one district of Luhansk oblast was divided into several parts artificially (district №110), while in 2012, the number of such districts increased to 5 (districts № №107, 108, 110, 111, and 112); - On the territory of the districts in Odessa oblast, formed for the parliamentary elections in 2002, there was no artificial enclave. However, in 2012, such enclave was formed on the territory of the electoral district №138. It was Yuzhne town that was artificially separated from the main part of the electoral district №139; - In 2002, there were no artificial enclaves on the territory of the electoral districts formed in Kharkiv oblast. In 2012, such enclave has emerged as a result of the separation of several polling stations from the main part of the electoral district №172 (corresponding stations appeared to be on the territory of the electoral district №170); - During the formation of districts in Cherkasy oblast for the 2012 elections district №195 was artificially divided into several parts. During the 2002 elections, boundaries of all the districts formed within the oblast were continuous; - The territory of the electoral district №210 (Chernihiv oblast), formed in 2012, consisted of two parts, separated from each other by the territory of Nosiv rayon, included to the electoral district №209. This division is artificial. In 2002, the boundaries of all the established districts were continuous; - In Kyiv city, district №221 formed in 2012 was artificially divided into two parts by the territory of the electoral district №211. However, none of the districts established in 2001 in Kiev was divided into several parts. At the same time, the division of a number of the electoral districts into several parts was determined by the natural factors and above all – by the peculiarities of the
administrative-territorial structure of individual regions. These peculiarities have led to the formation of the natural enclaves in some districts which also existed in 2002. For example, in 2001, due to the nature of its administrative-territorial division, into several parts were divided districts №№1 (Autonomous Republic of Crimea), 27, 29, 32, 33, 35, 37 (Dnipropetrivsk oblast), 48, 49, 51, 52 53, 57, 60 (Donetsk oblast), 95, 96 (Kyiv oblast), 104, 106, 108, 109, 111, 112, 115 (Luhansk oblast), 117 (Lviv oblast), 184 (Kherson oblast), 203 (Chernivtsi oblast), 225 (Sevastopol city).In 2012, the peculiarities of the administrative-territorial structure have led to breaking the boundaries of the districts №№1, 2 (Autonomous Republic of Crimea), 26, 30, 31, 33, 40 (Dnipropetrivsk oblast), 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 54 57, 60 (Donetsk oblast), 95, 96 (Kyiv oblast), 104, 105, 107, 110, 112 (Luhansk oblast), 116 (Lviv oblast), 183 (Kherson oblast), 195 (Cherkasy oblast), 225 (Sevastopol city). Inadequate consideration of the boundaries of rayons and cities of oblast importance inthe formationof electoral districts Possibility of ignoring the boundaries of rayons, cities of oblast importance and rayons in citis in determining boundaries of the electoral districts was not provided by the current Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” or the Law on parliamentary elections, which was used during the 2002 elections. On the one hand, it seems quite logical, because during the formation of districts often must be considered not only the boundaries of administrative units, but other factors too - such as geographical, logistical (state of the roads and transport infrastructure, etc.), as well as the formation of districts with approximately equal number of voters, etc. On the other hand, comparison of the boundaries of the electoral districts formed for the elections of 2002 and 2012 suggests that the number of rayons and cities divided between districts slightly increased, compared with 2002. Partly, the reason for this is that the current Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” excludes the possibility of exceeding the maximum determined limits of deviation of the number of voters in the district from the estimated average number of voters in single mandate districts (whereas for the 2002 election districts could be formed with the excess of maximum limits of deviation). At the same time, the influence of political factors on the configuration of the districts’ boundaries should not be ruled out.In 2012, some of the cities were divided between districts so that none of the districts was formed solely from the urban area. And Vinnitsa is a striking example. In 2002, a part of the city formed a separate district, and for the 2012 elections Vinnitsa was divided between two districts, which included parts of the Vinnytsia oblast. In 2002, during the formation of districts in big cities boundaries of these cities, in many cases, were taken into account. In other words, parts of these cities were not included in districts formed from the territories of the surrounding rayons. In particular, this applies to the cities such as Dnipropetrivsk, Ivano-Frankivsk, Ternopil, and Chernivtsi. However, in 2012, parts of these cities were included in the districts formed from the surrounding rayons. For example, a part of Amur-Nyzhnyodniprovsk rayon of Dnipropetrivsk was included in the district №29 formed mainly from Petrykivsky and Dnepropetrivsk rayons. The significant part of Ivano-Frankivsk was included in the district №84, formed from the territories of Galytsky, Tlumatsky and Tysmenytsky rayons. The western part of Ternopil was included it he district №165, formed from the territories of five rayons of Ternopil oblast. A part of Chernivtsi was referred to the district №203. Not the smallest role in such a division of oblast centers played the fact that the Law does not provide the possibility of exceeding the deviation of voters in districts from 12% of the estimated average number of voters in the district.
Divisionof territories of village and settlement councils between several districts During the formation of districts for the parliamentary elections in 2002 was ensured the consideration of boundaries of villages and settlements (village and settlement councils), which means that village and settlement councils were not divided between several districts. In 2012, this principle was violated:- The territory of Ilkivsk village council (Vinnytsia rayon of Vinnytsia oblast) was divided between two districts: the polling station №050149 was assigned to the district №11, and the stations №№050150 and 050151 - to the district №12; - The territory of Ksaverivka village council (Vinnitsa rayon of Vinnytsia oblast) was divided between the districts №№11 and 12. To each of them was assigned a polling station formed on the territory of the council; - The territory of Batradiv village council (Beregiv rayon of Zakarpattia oblast) was divided between the electoral districts №№69 and 73 (polling stations №№210003 and 210005 respectively); - The territory of Velykorakovets village council (Irshavsk rayon of Zakarpattia oblast) was divided between the districts №№71 and 73 (polling stations № № 210189-210190 and 210191 respectively); - The territory of Puznyakov village council (Mukachevo rayon of Zakarpattia oblast) was divided between the electoral districts №№69 (4 stations) and 71 (1 station); - Ruda village (Skvyra rayon of Kyiv oblast) was divided between districts №№91 and 92. To each of them was assigned one station created within the village. Neglecting the places of compact residence of national minorities during the formationof electoral districts In some regions of Ukraine (in particular, in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, Zakarpattia and Chernivtsi oblasts) the share of minorities in the total number of voters is significant. In addition, these minorities live compactly which allows considering the places of their compact residence during the formation of electoral districts. However, according to data provided by the regional departments of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine, the interests of national minorities in the formation of single mandate districts were not considered fully: - In Chernivtsi oblast, a part of Sadhora rayon of Chernivtsi city, which formerly belonged to a single mandate electoral district № 202 with its center in Chernivtsi (namely polling stations №730481 – 730486), was assigned to the single mandate district №203 with its center in Novoselytsia town. This led to the inclusion of approximately 9,000 Ukrainian-speaking voters in the district in which Romanian population is predominant by number. In addition, to the single mandate district №203 were included parts of villages of Storozhynets rayon (Velyky Kuchuriv, Kamyana, Mykhalcha, Snyachiv, Hlybochok, and Tysovets), in which most of the voters are Ukrainian-speaking. On the other hand, a number of Romanian-speaking villages of Storozhynets rayon which previously belonged to the former district №204 were included in the district №202. This led to the inclusion of approximately 10,000 Romanian-speaking voters in the district in which Ukrainian-speaking population is dominating by number. Thus, interests of the Romanian-speaking voters during the formation of districts in Chernivtsi oblast were not considered; - During the formation of single mandate districts for the organization and conduct of the 2002 elections in Zakarpattia oblast the CEC considered places of compact residence of national minorities of Hungarians. The result of this consideration was the formation of the electoral district №72, which included parts of Uzhhorod, Berehovo, Vynohradiv, Hust, and Tiachiv rayons. However, in 2012, the places of compact residence of the Hungarian minority were divided between 5 districts (68, 69, 71, 72, 73), which significantly narrowed the possibility of minority representation in the Parliament. Thus,
during the formation of districts within Zakarpattia oblast interests of the Hungarian minority were not taken into account; - The interests of minorities during the formation of districts in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea were not taken into account either. In particular, according to R. Chubarov, the percentage of voters who belong to the Crimean Tatars does not exceed 25-30% in any of the districts. At the same time, a share of Crimean Tatars in electoral district №8 became relatively large. Influence of political factors on determining boundaries of electoral districts Although the impact of politics on determination of boundaries of electoral districts can neither be confirmed nor denied, the boundaries of many of them set by the CEC were very “convenient” for some candidates and vice versa – “uncomfortable” for other politicians. If the CEC determined the boundaries of districts in a transparent way, with prior consultations on possible “configurations” of the districts between the major political parties, there would be no doubts in the impartiality of the body concerning the formation of districts. Formationof the polling stations The Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” introduced division of the polling stations into permanent and temporary and determined the general principles of their formation and operation. One of the positive sides of the Law was the restriction of maximum number of voters at polling stations by 2,500 voters (except external polling stations). However, in terms of regulating the formation of stations, the Law contained some drawbacks, including:- The Law didn’t define grounds and procedure for formation and revision of boundaries and liquidation of polling stations on a regular basis. As a result, the CEC had to take care of resolving such issues; - The Law didn’t give a clear answer to the question: what kind of special districts should be created on a regular, and what - on a temporary basis? As a result, the CEC classified stations at investigation isolators as temporary polling stations. In practice, this meant that in some isolators polling stations were not formed at all; - The Law didn’t set a full list of institutions, organizations and places of temporary stay of voters with limited mobility. In practice, absence of such list allowed DECs to form polling stations in health resorts, children's hospitals, etc. - The Law didn’t provide the possibility of formation of the external stations outside the foreign diplomatic institutions and military units (formations), stationed outside Ukraine. Although presence in external stations has been traditionally low, with high probability it can be assumed that some of the “external” voters were not able to vote because of the remoteness of diplomatic institutions from their places of residence. The CEC approved the Procedure of formation of regular, external and special polling stations on a regular basis with Resolution №11 of January 24, 2012, which has been revised during the course of the electoral process (August 14, 2012). January 19, 2012, the CEC also approved requirements for PEC premises and voting premises (CEC’s Resolution №5), and January 26, 2012 - requirements for DEC premises and DEC norms (CEC’s Resolution №18). Polling stations on a regular basis were formed by the CEC in a period determined by the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” (April 12, 2012, the CEC’s Resolution №66), that is in 190 days before the election day. However, even during the election process the list of polling stations on a regular basis has been substantially modified (most significant changes were declared by the CEC’s Resolutions №127 of April 12, 2012, №1140 of September 28, 2012, №1452 of October 12, 2012, №1747 of October 19, 2012, №1869 of October 25, 2012). During the reviewing of the CEC’s Resolution №66 were changed addresses of premises for
polling and addresses of PEC premises as well as boundaries of many polling stations. A substantial part of changes to this Resolution was introduced shortly before the election day. With lack of proper access of voters to information on stations’ boundaries and addresses of PEC premises, it could negatively affect the organization of the polling. As for the temporary polling stations, according to the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”, they had to be formed by DECs before September 12, 2012 inclusive. According to the decisions of DECs of the electoral districts №№1, 4, 5, 6, 12, 14, 20, 22, 25, 26, 31, 42, 46, 56, 57, 58, 67, 68, 74, 76, 80, 81, 82, 83, 90, 93, 94, 97, 99, 105, 109, 111, 113, 115, 117, 121, 126, 129, 134, 135, 138, 140, 143, 145, 152, 157, 165, 167, 170, 174, 182, 187, 194, 195, 201, 206, 207, 222, 223 were created 100 temporary special polling stations. In general, decisions on their formation were adopted in the statutory period, but not all of these decisions were issued in accordance with established requirements.In particular, in some cases, DECs’ resolutions established only locations of the polling stations without specifying other information related to their formation (the approximate number of voters at the polling station, etc.). From the contents of the Resolution of DEC’s of the electoral district №20 (Volyn oblast) it is not clear where exactly a special polling station on a temporary basis is formed. In some districts, polling stations were not formed due to the violation by the relevant authorities of the date of submissions for their formation or improper execution of the submissions. This applies, for example, to DECs of the electoral districts №№62 (Zhytomyr oblast) and 68 (Zakarpattia oblast). In addition, DEC of the electoral district №62 rejected a submission on formation of a special polling station and ordered to provide the polling for voters who would be assigned to this station in the polling station №181403. In some cases, despite the legislation, stations were formed in hospitals, although by the Law they should have been formed on a regular basis. In particular, this applies to stations in the electoral districts №№14, 81, 138, 140, 165, where the stations were formed in the central rayon hospitals. While individuals who are treated in health resorts can hardly be considered those who have limited mobility, DECs of several districts formed stations in health resorts. In particular, this was the case with DEC of the electoral distracts № №121 (stations were formed in 6 health resorts), 126 (2 stations in SOE “SKK Morshynkurort” and SOE “Sanatory Morshynsky”), 165 (station in health resort “Barvinok”).The DEC of the electoral district №195 (Cherkasy oblast) adopted a decision quite questionable from the point of view of the current electoral law (whereas children can hardly be considered voters with limited mobility) - to form 2 special polling stations in Cherkasy Oblast Children's Hospital and Cherkasy City Children's Hospital. 2. ACTIVITIES OF AUTHORITIES ON PREPARATION AND CONDUCT OF THE ELECTIONS Activities of the parliament and government The final version of the draft of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” was processes in the parliament without the involvement of experts and representatives of non-parliamentary political parties, which had a negative impact on its quality. It is worth noting at least that the final text of the Law was posted on the website of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine only after its adoption. Although the Law contains a number of progressive provisions (particularly in terms of narrowing the grounds for refusal/cancellation of candidate’s registration, revision of the procedure of forming election commissions to ensure adequate representation in their composition of opposition factions, etc.), it also had a number of significant drawbacks. The legal
uncertainty was also increased by the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine №№ 7-rp/2012 of 04.04.2012 and 8-rp/2012 of 05.04.2012. They determined as unconstitutional the provisions of the Law regarding the possibility of simultaneous balloting of one candidate for all-national and single mandate district as well as the assigning external polling stations to single mandate electoral districts formed in Kiev city.May 8, 2012, in order to eliminate the drawbacks of the new Law the CEC has prepared proposals for its improvement (CEC’s Resolution №83 of 05.08.2012). Proposals provided: a possibility of the formation of special polling stations in military units (formations), located far from population centers (as an exception); the registration of candidates’ trusted persons by DECs instead of the CEC; obliging DECs to control the use of finances of the election funds; mandatory reporting of the receipt and use of election funds both in paper and in electronic form; reducing the volume of candidates’ autobiography and election programs of parties and candidates; compulsory indication on ballots surnames of candidates, and not just their names and patronymics (as required by the current Law); clarifying the procedures of vote-counting and determination of election results with consideration of the recent decisions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. The CEC proposals formed the basis for the draft law №10533 of 24.05.2012, submitted for the Parliament’s consideration by deputies O. Kasyanyuk, V. Demchyshen and others. However, this draft law was not approved by the Parliament. Instead, July 5, 2012, People’s Deputies of Ukraine adopted the Law “On specifics of ensuring open, transparent and democratic parliamentary elections in Ukraine”. It provided installation of video-control systems at regular polling stations as well as real time broadcasting of the voting course at polling stations on a special website. The main drawbacks of the Law that worth noting are: - Non-compulsory installation of video-control systems in the PEC premises for voting in external and special stations, as well as in the DEC premises; - Non-compulsory online broadcasts of the vote-counting course at polling stations as well as broadcast of results determination by DECs; - Significant funding for the installation of video-control systems, which could be spent on financing of trainings of commission members on the electoral process and other purposes; - Establishing a special procedure for the procurements of goods, works and services needed for the creation and operation of video-control systems, namely - extracting relevant procurements from the scope of the Law “On State Procurement”; - The lack of effective sanctions for violating the statutory requirements for installation and operation of video-control systems; - Determination (considering further amendments to the Law) of rather narrow list of persons who are entitled to receive information from the CEC obtained using videocontrol systems (this list included courts, law enforcement structures, political parties and candidates); - Many issues related to the creation and operation of video-control systems were not regulated directly in the Law as well as establishing short terms for testing these systems (the latter was to be completed just in 10 days before the elections) and storing of the received information (1 year after the official establishing of the election results). Whereas the Law “On specifics of ensuring open, transparent and democratic parliamentary elections in Ukraine” was generally accepted in the same accelerated mode as the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”, the need for its revision appeared even before the next elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine. Amendments to this Law were made less than in a month before the election day (October 2, 2012), while the major part of the original drawbacks of the Law was not resolved by these amendments.Passivity of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in
establishing a sound legal framework for parliamentary elections was one of the reasons why the CEC filled gaps and eliminated drawbacks in the legal regulation of elections themselves, in some cases - going beyond their formal authority. In addition to adopting the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” and the Law “On specifics of ensuring open, transparent and democratic parliamentary elections in Ukraine” with subsequent changes, in the activities of the Parliament in the “election” field should be mentioned another direction – the responding to violations of the Law during the elections process. Specifically, November 6, 2012, the Parliament adopted the Resolution “On appeal of the Central Election Commission on Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine in single mandate electoral districts №№94, 132, 194, 197 and 223” and “On some measures to determine the state of compliance electoral law in some single mandate districts during the conduction of the next elections to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine”. The first Resolution of the CEC provided to appoint second elections in 5 single mandate districts and determine the amount of expenditure required to carry them out, while the second Resolution provided the formation of the temporary commission to investigate the circumstances of determining the results of the next elections in some districts, and the Prosecutor General's Office, the Supreme Council of Justice and the Supreme Commission of Judge Qualification were recommended to verify compliance with legislation during the campaign of law enforcement structures and courts. Relevance of the Verkhovna Rada’s Resolution on the appointment of the elections in five single mandate districts to the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” is doubtful (see Section X of this report). President of Ukraine has not issued any regulations to ensure the conduction of the elections in accordance with international standards. In this context, should be praised his predecessors L. Kuchma and V. Yushchenko, who issued decrees on these matters. Thus, October 30, 2001, President of Ukraine L. Kuchma signed the decree “On the ensuring of realization of human rights, the principles of a democratic society, open and transparent preparation and conduct of elections in 2002”. V. Yushchenko issued similar decrees before each nationwide elections (decrees “On ensuring democratic, fair and transparent elections in 2006” of 23.01.2006, “On ensuring the realization of the electoral rights of citizens of Ukraine, legal, transparent and open electoral process in the special elections to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine” of 04.07.2007, “On the realization of the electoral rights of citizens of Ukraine, transparent and open electoral process in the next presidential elections in Ukraine” of 16.10.2009). Moreover, despite the significant drawbacks on the stage of the vote counting and determination of election results in single mandate districts, as well as criticism of this stage of the electoral process by international observers, the President of Ukraine for a long time after the voting has not expressed his position in public concerning this criticism and numerous facts of electoral law violations. A more active role in the ensuring conduct of the parliamentary elections in accordance with international standards played the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. It created an interagency working group to ensure openness and transparency during the October 28, 2012 elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine, approved the Statute on it (Decree of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine № 633 of 16.07.2012), and adopted a number of regulations to ensure the implementation of existing laws on elections, including: - Approved the Procedure of procurement of goods, works and services required for the preparation and conduct of elections of People’s Deputies of Ukraine (the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine №320 of 23.04.2012); - Approved the Procedure for the use of funds allocated in the state budget for the creation and implementation of video-control systems at regular polling stations on a
regular basis during the elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine in 2012 (the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine №765 of 08.08.2012); - Adopted the Resolution “On procurement of goods, works and services required for the establishment and operation of video-control systems, video-recording and broadcasting images to monitor the conduct of polling and counting of votes on regular polling stations during the Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012” №764 of 13.08.2012; - Approved the Procedure for the use of funds allocated in the state budget for the purchase of paper for production by the State Voters Register of voters lists and personal invitations to prepare and conduct polling for the Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012” (the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine №811 of 29.08.2012); - Approved the Procedure of remuneration of members of district and station electoral commissions (the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine № 848 of 05.09.2012) 2. ACTIVITY OF THE CEC In a parliamentary inaction on creating a sound legal framework for the Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine, the major role in creating this foundation played the CEC. The latter generally operated transparently. Those acts of the CEC, which had to be adopted within a certain period, determined by the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”, were adopted by the CEC on time and generally comply with the requirements of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” (except for the acts which concerned the procedure of establishment of permanent polling stations, the procedure of determining voting results outside Ukraine and some others). The CEC created and secured the operation of the web site to broadcast course of voting at polling stations, provided data on the general information supply of the elections on its own web site, provided appropriate access of Internet users to timely information of DECs’ on the results of voting in districts and stations. Activity of the CEC was negatively impacted by: - The drawbacks of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”, which the Commission actually had to remove themselves;- Reduction of the total duration of the electoral process from 120 to 90 days;- Significant functional amount of work caused by laid on the CEC responsibilities for registration and cancellation of registration of candidates in all-national and single mandate districts, trusted and authorized persons, etc. (at the same time, due to the mass refusals from balloting in the last months before the elections, a significant part of the CEC acts concerned deregistration of candidates); - Narrowed scope of the CEC authority, in particular - in the monitoring procedure of nominating candidates by parties, using sanctions against the subjects of the election process, controlling over campaign funding (primarily, using funds other than election ones);- Political factors (such as political affiliation of its members with certain parties);Lack of funding, which made it difficult to conduct an active information campaign among voters and preparation of DEC and PEC members for the elections (the Commission carried out corresponding activities mainly through international technical assistance, rather than budget). As in the previous national election campaigns, quite common for the CEC work was the practice of preceding (before consideration at meetings of the Commission) consideration of the draft resolutions during closed meetings. The level of transparency of the Commission activity also somewhat lowered on the stage of vote counting and determination of voting results in districts – the news line was not updated promptly, the
responsiveness level of posting the CEC acts on the Commission's website was slightly reduced.An established practice of the “curatorship” of the CEC members over certain regions also deserves criticism - the territorial specialization of the CEC members has a negative impact on the work of the Commission as a body. Some of the decisions taken by the CEC had a quite controversial nature. Among them was a decision on the procedure of the establishment of polling stations on a regular basis (CEC’s Resolution №11), the sortition on nominees to DECs and PECs (CEC’s Resolutions №№69 and 895), ensuring polling of the voters according to the place of their stay without changing their voting address ( CEC’s Resolution № 893), determining voting results at external polling stations (decree №1089); registration of certain candidates (e.g., V. Satsyuk), broadening the grounds for refusal of registration of candidates (according to the legal opinion of the CEC, the lack of some information requested by the Law in documents submitted for registration was considered a failure to submit a document and grounds for refusal of registration of a candidate), refusal to determine voting results in five “problem” single mandate electoral districts. In particular, the CEC’s Resolution №11 meant that on a regular basis can be formed only special polling stations in hospitals and prisons that did not comply with the provisions of Article 21 of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”. The CEC’s Resolutions №№69 and 895 were supposed to determine the conduct of a single sortition on nominees to DECs and (within the boundaries of certain districts) PECs, which led to representation in the commissions “technical” parties that nominated 1-5 candidates in single mandate electoral districts, and the absence of any representative in the commissions from some parties or candidates (e.g., “UDAR” and “Svoboda” didn’t get representation in DECs at all). With the Resolution №1089 the CEC has expanded its legal powers on the establishment of election results in all-national district, while the CEC’s Resolution №893, although it prevented from the mass “migrations” on the election day, does not fully meet the requirements of the Constitution and the Law “On State Register of voters”. The essence of the adopted by the CEC Resolutions on the organization and conduct of the elections is shown below, in Table 2. Table 2. Activities of the CEC to establish a proper legal framework for the conduct of the Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine - October 28, 2012 Number, date of adoption On the procedure of CEC’s Resolution №69 the conduct by the of 19.04.2012 Central Election Commission of the sortition on the inclusion of nominees to the district election commissions on the elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine at the regular elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012 Name
Short content According to the Resolution, the sortition on candidacies to DECs is held if the number of nominees to DECs is greater than the number of vacant seats in DECs. The sortition is held not later than on the third day after the expiration date for making submissions regarding nominees to DECs. Vacant seats in bodies of all 225 DECs are
distributed among the parties in order of drawing lots with names of parties from a drum a party which drew the first lot is gaining the right to include all its proposed nominees in all the DECs, to which the candidates were offered.
On the Explanation of the Central Election Commission of the prohibition to give goods (excluding goods containing visual images of a name, symbol, ﬂag of a party, provided that the value The Resolution on the of such goods does not basis of the Law “On exceed three per cent of CEC’s Resolution №76 Elections of People's the minimum wage), Deputies of Ukraine” services, work, of 23.04.2012 explained the concept of securities, loans, lottery indirect bribery of voters. tickets, other material values (indirect bribery) to voters, institutions, organizations, and election commissions and their members during the elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine The procedure specified provisions of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of On the procedure of Ukraine” in the part of transferring of ballots manufacturing for the Elections of CEC’s Resolution procedures and People's Deputies of №85 of 17.05.2012 transferring of ballots by Ukraine to election a manufacture enterprise commissions to the CEC as well as transferring ballots from the CEC to DECs and from DECs to PECs. On the Procedure of CEC’s Resolution The Procedure defined submission by the №87 of 17.05.2012 frequency and types of district election financial reports that commissions of the must be submitted by ﬁnancial reports on the DECs to the CEC and receipt and use of funds the Treasury bodies. from the State Budget of Ukraine allocated for the preparation and conduct of the
Elections of People s Deputies of Ukraine
On the Explanation on compiling and updating voters lists to prepare and conduct polling in the Elections of CEC’s Resolution №96 People's Deputies of of 7.06.2012 Ukraine
On presentation to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine the Procedure of the remuneration of members of district and CEC’s Resolution №103 precinct election of 21.06.2012 commissions on the Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine
On approval of the procedure for opening CEC’s Resolution №104 and closing of election of 21.06.2012 funds accounts
On the form of the CEC’s Resolution №105 electoral list of of 27.06.2012 candidates to People's Deputies of Ukraine
The Explanations specified the procedure of compiling and updating the preliminary voters lists at regular polling stations, making changes or adjustments to the updated voters lists at a regular polling station, compiling and updating voters lists at special polling stations, compiling and updating preliminary voters lists at external polling stations, compiling voters lists at polling stations for the second round. The Procedure settled the matters of the remuneration of a member of the election commission who fulfills his/her duties in a relevant commission for wages; remuneration of commissioners on the election day and during the determination of polling results; approved the form of the civil contract with members of election commissions. The Resolution provided agreement for amending the Regulations on the procedure for opening, operating and closing accounts in national and foreign currencies, approved by the Resolution of the National Bank of Ukraine of November 12, 2003 № 492 on the procedure of opening and closing of election funds accounts. As the name of the Resolution shows, it adopted the form of the
from a political party in a multi mandate electoral district
On the procedure of charging and payment of one-time pecuniary reward to members of district and precinct election commissions on the Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine
On the Procedure for ﬁnancing district election commissions and precinct election commissions of external polling stations at the expense of the State Budget of Ukraine allocated for the preparation and
list of candidates from parties in multi mandate electoral districts. The electoral list should include: surname, name and patronymic, date, month and year of birth of the candidate, his/her nationality, time of continuous residence in the territory of Ukraine on election day, information about education, position (occupation), place of work, place of residence, party membership, presence or absence of a criminal record. The list of candidates should be submitted to the CEC on paper and in electronic form on an optical media. The Procedure determined the grounds for charging and general principles of paying a one-time pecuniary reward to commissioners. In particular, it provided that the amount of such CEC’s Resolution №108 reward depends on the of 12.07.2012 contribution of a commissioner in the commission's work, but can’t exceed the minimum wage and should be carried out within the limits of savings the payroll funds. CEC’s Resolution №110 The Procedure provided of 12.07.2012 the process for opening the allocations, accounting the receipt and use of funds of the State Budget of Ukraine allocated for DECs and PECs of external polling stations for the
conduct of the Elections of People s Deputies of Ukraine
On the Procedure for control over receipt, accounting and use of election funds of political parties, candidates from which are registered in allnational multi mandate electoral district and candidates for People's Deputies of Ukraine in single mandate electoral districts
On the Procedure for the sortition on the priority of granting political parties airtime and print space on the
preparation and conduct of the Elections of People’s Deputies of Ukraine. In general, the Procedure is based on the previous CEC’s regulations that established control procedure for the receipt and use of election funds of political parties. The main reason for his decision was the revision of the electoral system which regulates the election of People’s Deputies of Ukraine, as well as the need to arrange the procedures to control the flow and use of election funds of candidates in single mandate electoral districts. According to the CEC’s Resolution №115 procedure, the control of of 12.07.2012 the money flow on the accounts of election funds is carried out by the relevant banking institutions and the CEC, and (on the election funds of candidates in single mandate electoral districts) by the relevant district election commissions. Analysis of the procedure suggests that it can provide effective control over the legality of the receipt and use of election funds, but hardly can provide effective control over the financing of the election campaign of the subjects of the election process in general. CEC’s Resolution №119 The Procedure provided of 19.07.2012 the process of the sortition carried out by the CEC on the priority
expense and within funds of the State Budget of Ukraine allocated for the preparation and conduct of the regular elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine
On the Procedure for the sortition on the priority of granting candidates to People s Deputies of Ukraine airtime and print space on the expense and within the funds of the State Budget of Ukraine for the preparation and conduct of regular elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine
of granting parties, candidates to People's Deputies of Ukraine from which were registered in a multi mandate electoral district, airtime by the National Television Company of Ukraine, the National Radio Company of Ukraine, regional broadcasters for campaigning and printing of election programs in the newspapers “Golos Ukrainy”, “Uryadivy Kuryer”, as well as in the regional (local) print media of state or municipal ownership of each of the regions on the expense and within funds of the State Budget of Ukraine for the preparation and conduct of the regular elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine. According to the Procedure, the sortition is carried out at a meeting of the CEC in 53 days before the election day and includes 2 stages technical sortition to determine the priority of parties in participating in the main sortitions and main sortitions on the priority of grating airtime and print space for campaigning. CEC’s Resolution №120 The Procedure provided of 19.07.2012 the process of sortition carried out by the CEC on priority of granting candidates to People's Deputies of Ukraine, registered in single mandate electoral districts, airtime by the regional broadcasters for campaigning and printing
On the Procedure for attracting specialists, experts and technical personnel for organizational, legal and technical support for fulﬁlling duties of election commissions at the time of preparation and conduct of the elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine
On the Procedure for making and form of the ﬁnancial report on the receipt and use of election funds of political parties, candidates to People's Deputies of Ukraine from which were registered in allnational multi mandate electoral districts and candidates to People's Deputies of Ukraine in single mandate electoral districts On the form, size and layout of informational
of election programs in regional (local) print media on the expense and within the funds of the State Budget of Ukraine allocated for preparation and conduct of regular elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine. According to the Procedure, the sortition is carried out in one stage at a meeting of the CEC in 53 days before the election day in the presence of the candidates and their trusted persons. According to the Procedure, to ensure the implementation of its duties the CEC may involve no more than 150 persons, DEC - not more than 10 persons, PEC, depending on the CEC’s Resolution №122 size of a station - no of 19.07.2012 more than 1-2 persons. Specialists and technical staff work in the relevant commissions on the basis of civil contracts and are rewarded within payroll funds provided by the commission’s estimate of costs. The Procedure clarified the requirements for preparation of financial reports by managers of CEC’s Resolution №123 the election funds, and of 25.07.2012 determined a list of documents that should be added to the reports.
CEC’s Resolution №124 The Procedure defined of 25.07.2012 the process for making
posters of candidates to People s Deputies of Ukraine registered in single mandate electoral districts, the process of their production and transfer to precinct election commissions on the Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine and candidates to People's Deputies of Ukraine
On the form, size and layout of posters of political parties, candidates to People's Deputies of Ukraine from which were registered in allnational multi mandate electoral districts, the process of their production and transfer to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, district and precinct election commissions on the Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine
On the Procedure for verifying the fact of voter s temporary inability to move independently to organize voting for the Election of People s Deputies of Ukraine at the place of voters residence
posters of candidates to People’s Deputies of Ukraine registered in single mandate electoral districts as well as the process for their transfer to precinct election commissions and candidates on the expanse of the State Budget of Ukraine allocated for the preparation and conduct of the Elections of People's Deputies. The Procedure determines the process of:- Production on the expense of the State Budget of Ukraine allocated for the preparation and conduct of the Elections of People’s Deputies of posters of political parties, candidates to People's Deputies of Ukraine from which were CEC’s Resolution №125 registered in all-national of 25.07.2012 multi mandate electoral districts;- Receiving of them by the Central Election Commission from a manufacture enterprise;- Transfer to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine for precinct election commissions on the elections of deputies of external polling stations, district and precinct election commissions. CEC’s Resolution №126 According to the Law of 27.07.2012 “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”, PECs provide with an opportunity to vote at his/her place of residence a voter who is included in the list of voters at a polling
station, but due to an old age, disability or health conditions is not able to move independently. The Procedure determines how PECs verify temporary inability of a voter to move independently in order to organize voting at a place of his/her stay. According to the Resolution, the ballots must be of a size 200×600 mm and be protected against forgery. On the back of each ballot should be printed a number of a On the form and text of polling station. Despite the ballot for the the absence of the Election of People s Deputies of Ukraine CEC’s Resolution №632 relevant requirements in October 28, 2012 for of 29.08.2012 the Law “On Elections of voting in multi mandate People's Deputies of electoral district Ukraine”, the CEC’s Resolution provides that the ballots should include surnames, names and patronymics of the first 5 candidates from the list of each party included in ballots. The Procedure defined mandatory training of head, deputy head and On the Procedure for secretaries of DECs in training head, deputy order to give them head and secretaries of knowledge and skills district election CEC’s Resolution №692 necessary for the commissions on the of 31.08.2012 preparation and conduct Elections of People's of the Elections of Deputies of Ukraine People’s Deputies of October 28, 2012 Ukraine in the form of a seminar-meeting organized by the CEC. On the Procedure for CEC’s Resolution №733 The Procedure sending to the Central of 3.09.2012 established that for Election Commission publication on the official regulations of the website of the CEC districts election should be sent DECs’ commissions on the resolutions affecting the Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine, interests of an indefinite
representing the public interest to promulgate them On the Control Commission on the manufacturing of ballots for the Elections CEC’s Resolution №736 of People s Deputies of o 3.09.2012 Ukraine October 28, 2012
On the approval of the sortition results regarding the priority of granting political parties airtime and print space on the expense and within the State Budget of Ukraine for the preparation and conduct of the regular elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012 On the approval of the sortition results regarding the priority of granting candidates to People s Deputies of Ukraine airtime and print space on the expense and within the State Budget of Ukraine for the preparation and conduct of regular elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012
CEC’s Resolution №738 of 4.09.2012; CEC’s Resolution №739 of 4.09.2012
On the form of ballots CEC’s Resolution №764 for the Election of of 4.09.2012
number of participants in the election process that is representing the public interest. The Resolution approved the composition of the control commission on the manufacturing of ballots for the Election of People’s Deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012. The Resolutions approve the sortition results regarding the priority of:Providing with airtime by the National Television Company of Ukraine and the National Radio Company of Ukraine political parties and candidates to People’s Deputies for campaigning on the expanse of the State Budget of Ukraine;Printing of election programs of political parties and candidates to People’s Deputies in the newspapers “Golos Ukrainy” and ”Uryadovy Kuryer”;- Providing with airtime by regional broadcasters of state or municipal ownership of each of the regions of Ukraine political parties and candidates to People’s Deputies for campaigning through the budget;Printing of election programs of political parties and candidates to People’s Deputies in one of the regional print media state or municipal ownership of each of the regions of Ukraine. The Resolution approved the form of ballots for the
People s Deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012 for voting in single mandate electoral districts
Election of People's Deputies and their size, which is determined by the number of candidates running in a particular district.The text of the ballot is printed on one sheet of pale green paper, one side only, using special visible and invisible protective paints, as well as putting the number of a polling station with protective paint that appears on the back of the ballot.
On the text of ballots for the elections of The Resolution adopted people s deputies of CEC’s Resolution №765 texts of ballots for voting Ukraine October 28, 2012 in single mandate for voting in single of 4.09.2012 electoral districts. mandate electoral districts According to the Resolution of the CEC, organization of videocontrol in voting premises of the regular On the Procedure for polling stations is carried carrying out videocontrol at polling out by installing videostations with the use of control systems, videovideo-control means, recording and CEC’s Resolution №892 access to and control broadcasting images, over the video-control of 13.09.2012 which includes a set of system during the hardware and software elections of people's deputies of Ukraine as well as equipment for October 28, 2012 the formation of communication channels owned by the communication operators. On the forms of CEC’s Resolution №950 The Resolution election documents of of 17.09.2012 determined the forms of:precinct and district PEC reports on votes election commission on counting at polling vote counting at polling stations in all-national stations and multi mandate electoral determination of the results of the elections district;- PEC reports on of people's deputies of votes counting at polling Ukraine stations in single mandate electoral district;- DEC reports on votes recount at polling
On the Procedure for ballots transfer to PECs of the external polling stations
On the Explanations of vote counting at polling stations and making reports of the election commission on counting votes at a polling station after voting in elections of people's deputies of Ukraine
stations in all-national multi mandate electoral district within a single mandate electoral district and single mandate electoral district;- DEC reports on the voting outcome in all-national multi mandate electoral district within a single mandate electoral district and single mandate electoral district;- Acts on issuing copies of the PEC reports on vote counting at polling stations in multi mandate electoral district and single mandate electoral district. The Resolution provided the procedure for the ballots transfer from the CEC’s Resolution CEC to external polling №1003 of 20.09.2012 stations and established the forms of accompanying documents. The Resolution specified the procedure for:- Vote counting and filling the reports by precinct election commission on vote counting in allCEC’s Resolution national and single №1004 of 20.09.2012 mandate districts;Making report in case of declaration of voting at a polling stations invalid;Controlling the correct execution of a report.
On the Explanation of executing reports of the district election commission on the voting results in an allnational multi mandate Resolution electoral district within CEC’s №1005 of 20.09.2012 a single mandate electoral district and in a single mandate electoral district in the elections of people's deputies of Ukraine
The Explanations defined the algorithm of executing DEC reports based on information included in PEC reports of the relevant districts, as well as requirements for the execution of DEC reports.
On the Procedure for transfer to the Central Election Commission of timely information on the progress and results of the voting on the election day in elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine
On the Measures to ensure security of operating informationanalytical system The Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine , Uniﬁed analytical system The Elections
On Procedures for operation of the web site on the Internet for broadcasting video, obtained via videocontrol system at the premises of regular polling station during voting in the election of
The Resolution defined a list of information on the progress and results of the voting to be transferred to the CEC, and the procedure for the transfer. In particular, the PEC should inform the DEC of:- The lack of CEC’s Resolution № quorum at the 1074 of 25.09.2012 preparatory meeting of the PEC;- The number of voters on the voters lists at the closure of voting;The number of voters who received ballots until the closure of voting;Emergencies that prevented from voting. The Resolution of the CEC laid responsibility on DECs to establish working groups to ensure the safety of operation and secure state of the software and hardware set IAS “The Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”. The working groups were to include stuff from CEC’s Resolution SBU and the State №1450 of 12.10.2012 Service for Special Communication and Information Protection of Ukraine, and these working groups were to take measures to verify the state of security of IAS in terms of compliance with requirements of data protection in Ukraine before October 25, 2012. CEC’s Resolution The Procedure defined №1652 of 17.10.2012 interface features and design of the website http://vybory2012.gov.ua, principles of the support of its users and also provided mandatory registration and
people s deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012 On the Explanation of the application of certain provisions of the Law On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine on the issue of giving out ballots for the elections of people s deputies of Ukraine by precinct election commissions on the basis of a passport of Ukrainian citizen On the Explanation of the procedure of the transporting by precinct election commissions electoral documents on the elections of people's deputies of Ukraine to district election commissions On Amendments to the Procedure for videocontrol at polling stations with the use of video-control means, access to and control over operation of the video-control system during the elections of people's deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012
authorization (using account of one of the most popular social networks) of its users. According to the CEC’s Explanation, PECs’ duties do not include control over proper execution of a passport of Ukrainian citizen. That CEC’s Resolution is why refusal to give out №1817 of 22.10.2012 a ballot to a voter on the grounds of absence in the passport of a photograph that should be pasted when a voter reaches 25- or 45-yearold age is not allowed. The Explanation specified a list of subjects who have the right to transport election CEC’s Resolution documents to DECs, №1849 of 24.10.2012 including regular, special, intermediate and second elections of people’s deputies. The Regulation provided that at the entrance to the voting premises at a polling station, as well as inside of the premises, in noticeable place CEC’s Resolution a should be placed an A4 №1850 of 24.10.2012 sheet of paper, clearly indicating that the videocontrol is not conducted in the booth for a secret polling.
Activities of the local authorities In preparation for the regular elections of people’s deputies of Ukraine, local authorities have focused their activities on: - Determining locations for campaigning; - Monitoring the logistics of the electoral process, in particular, providing stations with space for work of election commissions and polling station; - Installing of video-control systems at polling stations; - Organizing PECs’ work on the election day, organizing interaction of authorities with international monitoring missions; - Informational and explanatory work among officials on the legal regulation of the elections of people’s deputies of Ukraine;
- Organizing work of the of officials of the State Voters Register on voters registration. Analysis of the information provided by the regional offices of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine suggests that the work of local authorities to organize the elections had a number of drawbacks, including these:- Local authorities didn’t create appropriate work conditions for all PECs and DECs, which is confirmed by an emergency state of premises of some PECs, the lack of suitable conditions for observing voting and vote counting (peculiarities of polling premises, absence of chairs, toilets, etc.); - Determining location of campaign materials in most of the regions was significantly stretched in time, which could complicate the propaganda activities of subjects of the election process who had limited financial resources; - Appropriate conditions for polling of voters with special needs were not created at most the of the polling stations (installation of ramps, etc.); - Authorities’ activities to ensure the proper conduct of the elections were not systematic - informational and explanatory measures for the officials were not held everywhere and dealt with various issues, while in cases when those actions were held, they were of a sporadic character (1 -2 activities for the entire period of the electoral process). 3. NOMINATION AND REGISTRATION OF CANDIDATES TO DEPUTIES Nominationof candidates to deputies The Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” secured a number of new provisions concerning the procedure to nominate candidates that are not reflected in its previous edition of 2004, including: - Not provided a possibility of nominating candidates to deputies by party blocks; - Provided a possibility of nominating candidates to deputies in single mandate electoral districts; - Excluded provisions on the compulsory registration of a party a year before the elections as the reason for acquiring the right to nominate candidates; - Liberalized requirements for holding party meetings (the nomination of candidates under the Law should be made in the manner prescribed by the party statute, the presence of representatives of the CEC at such meeting is not provided); - Narrowed grounds for refusal of registration of candidates and others.Nomination of candidates for the regular parliamentary elections showed absence of transparency, intra- and interparty conflicts, using “doubles” technology (nominating in a district one or more candidates with the same surnames, and sometimes - even names and patronymics in order to “scatter” votes for a candidate who had a high chance of being elected to the parliament), positioning pro-government candidates as independent ones, using “clone” organizations by candidates to get support – names of these organizations duplicated names of popular parties.To positives of 2012 campaign should be included active participation of candidates not involved in the major parties, who had high chances to overcome the electoral barrier, and also nominating by parties (especially in single mandate districts) persons who weren’t previously elected to the parliament . As a result, a significant number of such candidates were chosen deputies. The feature of 2012 elections was that the number of candidates, who have demonstrated significant activity in the “hypothetical” electoral districts before the delimitation of electoral districts, stopped campaigning after approving nominees in single mandate districts or transferred it to other electoral districts. In Lviv oblast in the electoral district №120, wasn’t nominated Yuriy Moravetsky, whom after disclosure by Ruh CHESNO of “Chesnometr” “UDAR” excluded from the list of potential majoritarians
because of doubts in his eligibility to Ruh’s Criterions of virtue. In Chernivtsi oblast, a businessman, deputy of the Chernivtsi Oblast Council from the Party of Regions Ivan Semenyuk, who has been actively leading charity work within the district №203 since 2011 and said in the media that he would win the elections in the district without any problems, was not nominated a candidate to people’s deputies - nor from the Party of Regions, neither by self-nomination. In Volyn oblast, Vasyl Stolyar - owner of the FC “Volyn” once located billboards in the electoral district №20 with the ad of his own charitable fund, but later didn’t registered in the CEC. The list of such cases is inexhaustive. In Khmelnitsky oblast, it was predicted that in the electoral district №193 would be nominated from the opposition a lawyer of the Kamyanets-Podilsk Rayon Council, a head of the rayon branch of the “Front Zmin” Victor Hudnyak. Prior to the election process, he located in his electoral district his outdoor advertising, but in the end was not nominated. In Ternopil oblast, a deputy Ivan Stoyko (united opposition) conducted an active propaganda activities in the electoral district №166, however, was not running in this district. He was assigned to an electoral district №167, while in the electoral district №166 opposition nominated a farmer M. Apostol. Within Zaporizhia oblast, in the electoral districts №№74 and 81 were actively working O. Berezhny and V. Butsanov respectively, but none of them has ever been nominated for a candidate to deputy. In electoral district №11 (Vinnytsia oblast) actively campaigned Serhiy Kudlayenko, a director of the administrative services department of Vinnytsia City Council, a deputy of the Regional Council (“Front Zmin” party, united opposition), but eventually in the district was nominated Nataliya Soleyko, a physician, a department head of Regional Children's Hospital, deputy of the Regional Council (AUU “Batkivshchyna”, united opposition). In electoral district №13 has been active Oleksiy Kryvopishyn, a head of the South-Western Railway, a deputy of the Regional Council (Party of Regions), but as a result in the district was nominated Andriy Kavunets, a head of the ideology department of Vinnytsa regional office of the Party of Regions. In Odessa oblast, a deputy chairman of the Party of Regions fraction in the Odessa City Council Yuriy Presnov showed high activity in the electoral district №133, but in this district the Party of Regions nominated a deputy head of the Oblast Council Oleksiy Goncharenko. Mykhaylo Yatskov from the Party of Regions showed some activity in the electoral district №140, but ultimately in this district no candidate was nominated from the Party of Regions. The Party of Regions “gave away” the district to Davyd Zhvania, and Mykhaylo Yatskov took an active part in his election campaign. Below are considered major flaws that occurred in the practice of nominating candidates in the elections of people's deputies of Ukraine in 2012. Non-transparent process of nominating candidates Analysis of the information released in the media suggests that the vast majority of parties nominated candidates for elections in non-transparent way. Journalists were not invited at the relevant meetings or were invited only to their formal part or “show”, where the names of the approved candidates were made public. Those contestants who organized the primaries (for example, “Ukraina - vpered!”) actually used this mechanism of interparty democracy only as a reason for agitation, while the “primaries” didn’t affect the order of serial numbers of candidates on the party list. The media spread information that the Party of Regions allegedly prepared several lists of candidates, while some potential candidates from AUU “Batkivshchyna” learn about “no-go positions” on electoral lists after reading these lists at public events for nomination of candidates. Non-transparent nature of nominating candidates is also affirmed by intraparty conflicts.
Intra-party and inter-party conflicts on the stage of nominating candidates to deputies Interparty conflicts mainly arose between the parties of oppositional direction (see Table below). Table 3. Examples of inter- and intra-party conﬂicts during the nomination of candidates to deputies from opposition parties Region
Point of the conﬂict Y. Nedyschuk announced his intention to ballot in the electoral district №19. However, a head of the oblast branch of “Front Zmin” O. Pysa said in Facebook network that “Front Zmin” didn’t approve Y. Nedyschuk as a candidate. P. Zhebrivsky, nominated in the electoral district №63, was rejected as a candidate by the “Front Zmin”, whose representatives claimed they didn’t approve a candidacy of Zhebrovsky. V. Ostryanskyy and V. Maksymov, who were to be nominated from “Batkivshchyna”, eventually, took part in the elections as candidates put forward by self-nomination. At the same time, they criticized the central leadership of the party and were excluded from the ranks of “Batkivshchyna”, although both of them are active members of Zaporizhia City Council from BYuT faction. The main conflict in the opposition camp has emerged in the electoral district №84 between Dmytro Shlemko and Mykhola Zelinsky. Long-time activist of “Batkivshchyna” M. Zelinsky tried to become an approved opposition candidate, but this place was taken by a candidate Volodymyr Kupchak. However, Kupchak didn’t conduct an active election work in the district and is a much weaker candidate than Zelinsky. In electoral districts №№121 and 123 deputies of the Lviv Regional Council from AUU “Svoboda” Mykhaylo Zadorozhny and Ostap Kanaka registered themselves as independent candidates bypassing the
arrangements within AUU “Batkivshchyna” about the joint candidate, prompting criticism of Oleg Tyahnybok, a leader of AUU “Svoboda”. Were not able to find common ground R. Zastavny (now “Front Zmin”) and O. Kayda (a head of the Oblast Council, AUU “Svoboda”). A head of Antonivka Village Council I. Semenchev was forced to quit “UDAR” party for a number of reasons. Some of them were the loss of the electorate as a result of the formation of districts, advent to “UDAR” of a well-known businessman A. Putilov, which (according to some data) led to personal opposition between these two members, discrediting campaign deployed against I. Semenchev caused by the conflict situation around the construction plans in the territory of Antonivka Village Council a new transport port-terminal. For violation of party discipline from the party “UDAR” was expelled Volodymyr Tokaryuk who was registered as a candidate in the electoral district №202 by selfnomination. The party nominated as a candidate for this electoral district Klavdiya Nazarenko – a former head of the education department of Vizhnitsk Rayon State Administration.
As for the Party of Regions, during the nomination of its candidates there also were conflicts. Thus, in district №76 of Zaporizhia oblast the conflict emerged during nomination process of a former mayor Y. Kartashov. In Kyiv oblast, publicity gained an intraparty conflict between T. Zasuha and S. Mazepa. In Odessa oblast, in June 2012 emerged more active confrontation between I. Plohy and A. Kise for the right to be nominated from the Party of Regions in the electoral district №142. A similar conflict arose between O. Goncharenko and Y. Presnov in electoral district №133. Separation of candidates to deputies from their political links with certain parties to increase support of the electorate The practice of separating candidates from various parties became particularly prevalent in those regions where the rating of a party with which actually was associated potential candidate was low and continued to drop, while rating of the candidate had the potential to grow. In Dnipropetrivsk oblast, as independent candidates positioned themselves V. Shylova (electoral district №38), O. Dubinina (electoral district №30) and Y. Bezbakh. Independent candidate in Mykolaiv oblast (electoral district № 132) became a businessman A. Kozlovsky, and in Cherkasy oblast
(electoral district №197) - B. Hubsky. In Rivne oblast, O. Chervonyuk in the last local elections balloted to Rivne Oblast Council from the party “Sylna Ukraina”, but in public materials there were no mentions of his party membership. In Ternopil oblast, a number of politicians close to the Party of Regions were trying not to “advertise” their relations with this party and have positioned themselves as independent candidates. Among such politicians were, for example, V. Klymenko, I. Tchaikovsky and V. Bedrykivsky. Also, was trying not to associate himself publicly with the Party of Regions a candidate in electoral district №154 D. Korylkevych, who is a deputy of Rivne Oblast Council and is a member of the Party of Regions fraction. In Khmelnytsky oblast, V. Melnychenko in all his speeches presented himself solely as a deputy of the Oblast Council from the Party of Regions, but at the same time, he insisted that in the parliamentary elections he would run as an independent candidate. Nominationof “double” candidates In many single mandate electoral districts, were nominated candidates to deputies with the same surnames, and sometimes - even names and patronymics. This created a ground to mislead voters on the election day to reduce the chances for winning of a popular candidate by voters voting for his “double” – a “technical” candidate. For example, in Khmelnytsky oblast, in electoral district №187 as a candidate to deputy was registered Slobodana Oleksandra Vyacheslavovycha, a People’s Deputy of Ukraine, a general director of “Obolon” enterprise. In the same district (also as “independent candidate”) was registered Slobodyan Oleksandr Mykholayovuch, a resident of Sutkivtsi village of Yarmolynets rayon, who works as a driver of “Berehynya” enterprise. In electoral district №191, as candidates to deputies were registered two Viktor Bondars, two Derykots, and two Vasyl Shpakivs. This practice has become common in several other electoral districts. However, part of the “doubles” refused from balloting before the voting of the parliamentary elections in 2012. Using “clone” organizations, names of which reproduce the names of popular parties, by candidates to getextra support In some single mandate electoral districts candidates actively used for their support “clone” organization, names of which somewhat duplicate the names of popular parties. For example, in the electoral district №189 (Khmelnytsky oblast) as an independent candidate to deputy was registered a former head of the Khmelnytsky Oblast State Administration, a former first deputy of the State Tax Service Oleksandr Bukhanevych. Less than two months before the election, he registered an oblast organization “Obyednannya Za Batkivshchynu”. In fact, this was a “clone” organization, name of which mislead voters who wanted support a candidate from AUU “Batkivshchyna”. Despite the fact that the candidate from “Svoboda” I. Sabiy was the only opposition candidate supported by the united opposition AUU “Batkivshchyna”, it can be assumed that O. Bukhanevych, who took the third place in the district, took away a part of voices from I. Sabiy. Registrationand deregistrationof candidates to deputies Registration of candidates to deputies was held by the CEC in a period established by the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”. Overall, significant violations of the current election law during the registration of candidates to deputies were not recorded (except registration of a candidate V. Satsyuk, who over the past 5 years has not resided in Ukraine; see below). Potential candidates to deputies (S. Chervonopysky, S. Kovalchuk, M. Kozyrsky) who were denied registration, challenged decisions adopted by the CEC in court and have been registered by the Commission. According to the CEC, the total number of candidates registered before the elections were 5,207,
including 2,554 candidates nominated in the all-national electoral district by party lists. According to the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”, for becoming a subject of electoral process it is enough for a party to nominate only one candidate, that is why the corresponding status was granted 87 parties. The main grounds for refusal to register and cancellation of registration were:Submitted registration documents didn’t meet the requirements of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” (e.g., improper execution of the declaration of property and income of a candidate, lack of specific information in an autobiography, etc.); - Failure of candidates to deputies to submit all the required by Law documents, including a document of making election pledges (the CEC’s Resolutions №№363, 368, 372, etc.); - Applying for registration in more than one electoral district (the CEC’s Resolution №417); - Refusal of a candidate to ballot (the CEC’s Resolution №№421, 463, etc.); - Not withdrawn or unsettled in a legal way conviction for a deliberate crime (3 cases). To the main problems associated with the registration of candidates should be included the following: Uncertainconcept of permanent residence inUkraine The concept of permanent residence on the territory of Ukraine for the last 5 years before the elections under the current Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” is not clearly defined, which in practice has led to varying interpretations. Thus, A. Shevchenko and V. Klitschko were registered as candidates to deputies, although in the last 5 years they were living outside Ukraine for some time. According to the same logic, the CEC registered as a candidate to deputy a former deputy head of the SBU V. Satsyuk, who also periodically crossed the state border of Ukraine. However, the CEC’s decision on his registration has been challenged in court, and the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine as an appellate court confirmed the decision of the court of the first instance on its illegality. Without resorting to the analysis of the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine, it is worth noting that the concept of permanent residence in Ukraine requires additional clarification. Eliminating some opposition leaders from participating inelections The CEC refused to register opposition leaders Y. Tymoshenko and Y. Lutsenko as candidates in connection with convictions for intentional crimes. Although the relevant decision of the CEC fully comply with the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”, exclusion from participation in the electoral process of opposition leaders questioned the democratic character of the elections - especially given the fact that internationally relevant sentences were classified as those that indicate selective application of justice in Ukraine. Expanded interpreting by the CEC of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” regarding grounds for refusal to register candidates Although the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” doesn’t directly provide for the possibility of rejection of candidate registration in the case of submitting to the CEC documents executed not in compliance with its requirements (unambiguous grounds for refusal of registration can only be failing to submit all documents required by the Law), the CEC in solving the matter of the refusal to register certain candidates came from the fact that a document executed with violating requirements of the Law
can’t be considered a document required by Law, and therefore, considered to have been submitted to the CEC. It is on this interpretation of the Law was based the majority of the CEC’s decisions of refusal to register candidates. Without resorting to the analysis of the legality of the relevant decisions of the CEC, it should be noted that the law should directly provide for refusing registration of candidates not only in case of failure to submit to the CEC all necessary registration documents, but in case of absence in legal documents information specified by the Law. Alterations to the ballot with the stamp “Withdrawn” as the result of canceling the registrationof candidates ina relatively short time before the electionday During September and October of 2012 canceling the registration of candidates by the CEC had a massive character. The main basis for the relevant decisions was candidates’ applications on refusals to ballot as well as addresses of parties to cancel the decisions on registration of candidates. The Part Four of Article 61 of the Law provides that such applications and addresses should be submitted to the CEC no later than in 12 days before the election day. Mass submission of these applications and addresses shortly before the deadline for submission in practice led to the inability to reprint ballots for a number of districts and adopting by the CEC decision to alternate the ballots in all-national electoral district and ballots of a significant part of the single mandate electoral districts with the stamp “Withdrawn”(see the CEC’s Resolution № №821 and 822). On the election day, it appeared that at some polling stations the stamp “Withdrawn” was stamped across the name of AUU “Svoboda” and not across the name of a political party “Ukrainska Platforma Sobor”, which shortly before the election day addressed to the CEC concerning decision to cancel the registration of its candidates in all-national electoral district. The reprint of the ballots for certain districts (in cases when such a reprint was technically possible; see the CEC’s №1650) resulted in increased expenditure on the elections in the respective districts. 4. FORMATION AND ACTIVITY OF THE DISTRICT ELECTORAL COMMISSIONS Formationand changes inthe DECs The main drawbacks of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” concerning the formation of the district election commissions should include the establishment of a shorter period to make decisions about DECs formation, admission to participate in formation of DECs all parties that nominated at least one candidate to deputy, non-compulsory training for the DECs’ members on the elections before the appointment to the DECs, uncertain procedure of sortition on nominees to the DECs, and the possibility of replacing DECs’ members with nominees at any stage of the electoral process.To ensure the implementation of regulations of the Law concerning the formation of DECs by the Central Election Commission was adopted a number of resolutions. The most controversial among them was the Resolution №69 of April 19, 2012, which approved the procedure of the sortition carried out by the Central Election Commission on the inclusion of nominees to the district election commissions on the elections of people's deputies of Ukraine at the regular elections of people's deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012. According to this Resolution, vacancies in 225 DECs had to be allocated between the parties in the priority determined by sortitions - a party whose lot was extracted first got the priority right to representation in all DECs, to which it has suggested its candidates.The drawbacks of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” and the CEC’s Resolution №69 resulted in a number of issues concerning the formation of DECs and amending their composition:
Over-representation in DECs of little-known parties and parties that nominated several candidates insingle mandate electoral districts August 26, 2012, the CEC adopted the Resolution № 604 “On the formation of district election commissions on the elections of people's deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012”. The decision to form the district election commissions was adopted in accordance with the provisions of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” and the procedure of conduct by the Central Election Commission of the sortition on inclusion of candidates to the district election commission on the elections of people's deputies of Ukraine at the regular elections of people's deputies of Ukraine October 28, 2012.According to results of the sortitions on the composition of the district commissions, some influential parties (e.g., “UDAR” and AUU “Svoboda”) actually lost their representatives in DECs, while the representation in DECs received:- ChristianDemocratic Party of Ukraine (nominated only 3 candidates in single mandate electoral districts; according to the results of the sortition, won representation in 219 DECs); - AUPU “Yedyna Rodyna” (nominated one candidate in single mandate electoral district and won representation in 212 DECs); - “Yedyny Centr” (nominated 9 candidates in single mandate electoral districts and won representation in 43 DECs); - “Soyuz Anarkhistiv Ukrainy” (nominated two candidates and won representation in 220 DECs);- “Rus Yedyna” and “Bratstvo” (nominated respectively 3 and 1 candidate and won representation in the 225 DECs each); - the National Ecological Party (with 1 candidates in single mandate electoral district was represented in the composition of the 32 DECs); - “Ruska Yednist” (nominated five candidates in the electoral districts and won representation in 221 DECs); - “Molod Do Vlady” (with one candidate was represented in all 225 DECs). Appointment to positions in DECs persons unprepared to conduct the elections, not informed of their inclusion in DECs or not ready to work in commissions The Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” does not provide mandatory training on the election of candidates for inclusion in DECs. The narrow time frame allowed for the formation of DECs significantly complicated verification of the parties’ submissions regarding nominees for DECs in terms of reliability of information included in them. Accordingly, in some regions, newly appointed members of DECs learned that they were proposed for inclusion in DECs and appointed to the commission only after the calls of the commissions’ secretaries. In many DECs, it was impossible to contact members of the commission, while some commissioners refused to work in commissions in connection with the fact that they were living in other regions. To the composition of certain commissions were included individuals who did not have any experience in the field of elections (e.g., a head of the DEC of the electoral district №89 was appointed a person born in 1989). EXAMPLES OF PROBLEMS IN THE WORK ORGANIZATION OF DECs AFTER THEIR INITIAL FORMATION Lviv oblast. In the DEC of the electoral district №121 three members of the DEC permanently resided in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and Kyiv and did not respond to phone calls. The common situation took place in the electoral district №123.Luhansk oblast, Severodonetsk. The DEC №106 wasn’t able to gather the first meeting due to the lack of quorum. The second time the commission managed to gather with a minimum quorum of 10 people. As it turned out, three of the DEC members are residents of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea: a deputy head of the DEC - unemployed Igor Krasylnykov
(“Bratstvo” party), a member of the commission – non-working Kateryna Dzykovych (“Rusky Blok” party) and her colleague - entrepreneur Maryna Pronina (“Rus Yedyna” party). Two more members of the DEC are residents of Kyiv oblast: Yulia Vyahireva (“Yedyna Rodyna” party) and Yevhen Cherednychenko (“Soyuz Anarkhistiv Ukrainy”). And another one - Oleksiy Postupalsky (“Ruska Yednist” party) – is a resident of Khmelnitsky oblast. Kherson oblast. Under threat of disruption was the work of two DEC. At the meetings of the commissions were not present two newly elected heads – a head of Suvorivsk DEC №182, 75-year-old representative of “Rusky blok” Serhiy Grushyn and a head of Tsyurupynsk DEC № 186, 20-year-old representative of the “Yedyna Rodyna” Tetyana Yevsovych. Members of DEC had no phone numbers and contact information of newly elected heads at their disposal, so they were forced to self-organization to hold the first meeting in the term prescribed by the Law. Cherkasy oblast. In the electoral district № 194 a head of the DEC was appointed 21-year-old Iryna Smesheva from the party “Soyuz Anarkhistiv Ukrainy”, who did not come to the first meeting of the commission. After the opposition claim to Cherkassy Administrative Court concerning omissions of the head of the DEC №194 it was revealed that Iryna Semesheva has no relation to the political party “Soyuz Anarkhistiv Ukrainy”, which quota won her this position. Moreover, she stated that had never written a request to become a member of the DEC. The only thing she admitted was writing an application to become an observer from the “Obyednani Livi I Selyany ” party.Source: The data of regional offices of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine Frequent changes in DEC composition and obtaining actual control over DEC by one or two parties Immediately after the formation of DECs nominators of candidates started to replace the newly appointed members with other individuals. Accordingly, the CEC during August November of 2012 adopted dozens of decisions on amendments to the DECs (see, in particular, the CEC’s Resolutions №№645, 693, 709, 737, 766, 780, 794, 817, 831, 844, 856 , 876, 890, 918, 936, 949, 970, 991, 1002, 1029, 1043, 1073, 1098, 1119, 1120, 1121, 1144, 1166, 1185, 1205, 1224, 1253, 1280, 1301, 1322, 1344 , 1369, 1394, 1461, 1550, 1649, 1685, 1714, 1754, 1786, 1826, 1853, 1874, 1892), which resulted in changing the primary composition of most of the DECs before the election day by more than 50%. At the same time, amendments to DEC compositions continued on the eve of the voting day and after the voting (the CEC’s Resolutions №№1911, 1916, 1921-1925, 1933). Frequent changes in the DEC composition negatively affected the organization of the electoral process in general and largely annihilated efforts of the CEC to train DEC members on electoral matters. A direct consequence of the inclusion to DEC representatives of the “technical” parties and frequent changes in DECs was receiving by certain parties the actual control over commissions. In many cases, the DECs were actually controlled by the Party of Regions. Thus, in one of the reports of the CVU on observation in 2012 elections emphasized that in Kherson oblast 56 of 90 members of the DECs were in one way or another connected with the Party of Region, although were not nominated by it. For example, a head of the election commission №182 Andriy Murashkin was nominated to the DEC by the “Rusky blok”, although he was a member of Kherson TEC from the Party of Regions. A deputy chairman of the DEC №183 Thaisiya Kreyza, who was put forward in these elections by a political party “Molod Do Vlady”, in 2010 was a head of the DEC from presidential candidate Viktor Yanukovych. A secretary of the DEC №3 represented “Bratstvo” party and at the same time was a
deputy of the City Cuncil from the Party of Regions. A deputy head of the DEC №5 was nominated by “Soyuz Anarkhistiv Ukrainy”, although in the last parliamentary elections represented Party of Regions in the DEC. A head of the DEC №4 (ARC) from “Narodno-Trudovy Soyuz Ukrainy” before her appointment was a member of the city organization of the Party of Regions. In the DEC of the electoral district № 57 (Donetsk oblast) 10 of the 18 members worked in PJSC “Mariupolsky Metalurhiyny Kombinat Imeni Illicha” (these persons were proposed for inclusion to the DEC from the Party of Regions and the People's Party, “Rusky blok”, “Soyuz Anarkhistiv Ukrainy”, the Liberal Party of Ukraine, “Yedyna Rodyna” party, “Bratstvo”, “Ruska Yednist”, the Ukrainian Party “Zelena Planeta”, “Rus Yedyna”). A head, a deputy head, and a secretary of the commission were also employees of this enterprise. At the DEC’s meetings of the district № 135 (Odessa oblast) were heard public statements that from the 18 commission members 16 were representing the Party of Regions. In any case, six members of the commission (including its entire leading team) were employees of Odessa Law Academy, whose president was a candidate to deputy from this district Serhiy Kivalov. Connection with the Party of Regions also had 7 members of the DEC of the electoral district № 201 (Chernivtsi oblast). As in other DECs, formally their nominations were made not by the Party of Regions but other parties already mentioned above – “Bratstvo”, “Ruska Yednist”, “Rus Yedyna”, “Soyuz Anarkhistiv Ukrainy”, “Narodno-Trudovy Soyuz Ukrainy” and others. The same political configuration of the Party of Regions and other mentioned parties arose in the DECs of many other districts, including electoral districts №№179, 202, 203, 204, etc. However, the activity of a number of the DECs was controlled not only by the Party of Regions, but by the other political forces and also candidates in single mandate electoral districts. Thus, in Vinnytsia oblast control over DEC’s work №11 was set by “UDAR” and the Party of Regions; control over the DEC №12 belonged to the Party of Regions and candidate to deputy P. Poroshenko, the DEC №16 was controlled by candidate to people’s deputy of Ukraine O. Kaletnyk. In Sumy oblast, control over the DECs’ activity was equally divided between the Party of Regions and the opposition forces. Lack of representation in DECs of candidates registered in single mandate electoral districts According to the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”, the right to nominate candidates to the district election commissions granted only factions and parties - electoral subjects. Meanwhile, the formation of DECs by the Law is carried out after the registration of candidates (the DECs should be formed by the CEC in 62 days before the election day, while the decision on registration of candidates to deputies should be taken by the CEC in 70 days before the voting). As candidates for deputies in single mandate districts are entitled to make nominations to PECs, depriving them of the right to nominate a member to DECs, which set up the results of the voting in single mandate electoral districts, does not seem quite logical. Activity of DECs onpreparationand conduct of the elections Appropriate conditions for the DECs work was established in almost all regions, although in some cases commissions were not provided with adequate premises, office equipment, etc. In particular, problems with premises for work had: the DEC of the electoral district № 97 (Kyiv oblast), premises of which did not meet the specified requirements; the DEC of the electoral district № 150 (Poltava oblast), premises of which were located in the museum, the DEC of the district № 195 (Cherkasy oblast), premises of which were in the state of disrepair, the DEC of the district № 19 (Volyn oblast), premises of which had a small area. Also did not meet the established requirements the premises of the DEC of the electoral district № 200 (Cherkasy oblast).
The DEC of the electoral district № 185 (Kherson oblast) received office equipment that was used in the commission’s work back in 2005-2006 and since then has not been updated. As a result, there were constant problems both during maintenance of the equipment and while connecting to the server of the CEC. In Khmelnitsky oblast, by the first meeting of the DEC the premises of the commissions were not adapted for working there. The commissions were also not provided with office equipment, telephone communications, transport, signs “District Election Commission”, etc. These technical problems were solved during the first decade of September, which had a negative impact on work of the respective commission. In Rivne oblast, the DEC was not provided with adequate access to the Internet, which led to failures in work of the CIAS “The Elections”, including sortition process on the inclusion of nominees to the PECs. In the DEC of the district № 126 (Lviv oblast) for a long time did not work a computer, while in the DECs of the districts №№20 and 21 (Volyn oblast) were recorded problems with providing commissions with stationery. The DECs activities were generally clear, although some commission denied electoral subjects to provide them with certain documents, did not allow media representatives or observers to its meetings. Specifically, in October 2012 to the meeting of the DEC of the district № 10 (ARC) were not allowed journalists of the Black Sea TRC. In addition, the DEC of this district attempted to deprive of the right to be present at a meeting authorized representatives and observers from “Batkivshchyna”. In the electoral district №92 (Kyiv oblast) were recorded cases of not allowing to the meetings of the DEC official observers and trusted persons of candidates. Not allowance was explained by the absence of their pre-registration on the day of the meeting. A member of the DEC of the electoral district № 193 (Khmelnytsky oblast) V. Belinsky (“Rusky blok” party) tried to take away a camera and push out from the premises of the commission the official observer from AUU “Batkivshchyna”. Members of the same DEC T. Ostafiychuk (fraction of the Party of Regions), V. Pylypchuk (fraction of the People's Party) and V. Belinsky (“Rusky block” party) tried to prevent activities of authorized and trusted persons and work of an observer from AUU “Batkivshchyna”. Most of the DECs formed within the Luhansk oblast did not fulfill the requirements of the electoral law regarding mandatory disclosure of the decisions of election commissions. In the DEC of the electoral district № 126 (Lviv oblast) commission meetings were convoked in 20-30 minutes prior to their conduct. In Volyn oblast, were recorded several cases of “disappearance” of official materials from the stands of the DEC of the electoral districts №№20 and 22. The DEC of the electoral districts №№164 and 167 (Ternopil oblast) did not posted their resolutions on an announcement board. Examination of complaints by district commissions in most cases was not ineffective, while the main amount of work on their consideration was laid on commissions only in October 2012. Absence of the significant amount of work laid on the DECs regarding complaints was explained by the narrowed competence of the DECs on the settlement of electoral disputes - according to the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” DECs are entitled only to consider complaints only against decisions, actions or omissions of PECs and their members (PECs were formed only in late September 2012), as well as violation of election laws by parties that nominated candidates in single mandate electoral districts. Inefficiency of examination of the complaints was determined by insufficient level of training of DEC members on election issues and politicization of the commissions’ work. These factors, as well as inadequate law training of candidates, trusted and authorized persons were the main reason that DECs left most of the complaints without consideration or without satisfaction of complainants. For example, in Khmelnytsky oblast, the DEC of the electoral district №193
(Kamyanets-Podilsky) did not accept complaints of inaction of heads of PECs on the socalled “not being able to get through on the phone” to the PEC’s members from the “UDAR” party under the pretext that the DEC’s member on duty was not authorized to accept complaints. In Lviv oblast, the DEC of the electoral district №115 (Lviv city) received two complaints about not fulfilling by heads of two PECs their direct duties. Initially, the DEC members could not take any decision on the complaints due to lack of the required number of votes, but later admitted violations. To DECs often were sent complaints about violations of the Law on the election candidates, although consideration of such complaints is within the jurisdiction of the CEC. At the same time, DECs considered the complaint, which in fact exceeded their authority. Thus, August 24, 2012 in Khotyn (Chernivtsi oblast) on behalf of “The Charitable Foundation of Ruslan Panchyshyn” a candidate to people's deputy of Ukraine (the electoral district №204, self-nomination) Ruslan Panchyshyn gave 3 mobile phones during the conduct of rayon sports competition among people with disabilities. This action has been appealed to the DEC of the electoral district №204. In its decision on the complaint of the authorized person of AUU “Batkivshchyna” V. Ryzhyy of August 28 concerning the illegal actions of a candidate to deputy Ruslan Panchyshyn, the DEC noted that “complaints on accusation of illegal activities and violations of electoral law are excogitated, unfounded, baseless and must be rejected”. The commission motivated its decision by stating that the candidate “has no relation to the fund, is not a member or a founder”, and hence “rules of Part 13 of Article 74 of the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” can’t be applied to Ruslan Panchyshyn as a candidate to people’s deputies of Ukraine”. The registration of official observers of the DECs generally was carried out in compliance with the electoral law, although in a number of regions for some time observers could not register themselves because of the lack of certification forms or in connection with the fact that DECs required from them to submit documents not provided by the Law “On Elections of People’s Deputies of Ukraine”. In Lviv oblast, the DECs after their formation did not accept submissions for registration of official observers, explaining it by the lack of certification forms. A similar situation occurred in the electoral district №132 (Mykolaiv oblast), where DEC did not register observers in the absence of certification forms (although after arrival of the forms a head of the DEC personally called representatives of NGOs and informed about the possibility of granting certificates). Certification forms were missing in the DECs of the electoral districts № №63, 67, 84, 85, 97, 98, 185, and 193. Some DECs demanded making submissions for registration of observers not only on paper but also in electronic form, referring to the information paper of the CEC (this applies, in particular, to the DECs of the electoral districts №№3, 7, 10, 117, 141, 142, 187 , 188, and 191). Some DECs demanded from a person who was making a submission for registration of an observer providing a notarized power of attorney (DECs of the districts №№7 and 92). In electoral district № 124 (Lviv oblast) from a representative of CVU was required an order for registration of observer and gaining a certificate. In Odessa oblast, in the DEC of the electoral district №134 it was refused to accept the submission of registration of observer from CVU, explaining this by the lack of title of a head of CVU near his surname. Members of the DEC №7 (ARC), except submitting documents electronically and having a notarized power of attorney were required to fill out the submission not in handwritten form, but through computer - only in a form prescribed by the CEC. At the same time, all documents were to be submitted in one folder. The DECs of the electoral districts № №163 and 164 in Ternopil oblast registered observers with deadlines violations – it took more than 2 weeks from the date of submission to registration.
5. FORMATION AND ACTIVITY OF PECs Formation and changes in PECs In part regulating the formation of PSCs the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine” contained the same flaws as the provisions of the Law, which set procedure for forming the DECs. The original version of the procedure for sortition on the inclusion of nominees to the precinct election commissions provided the conduct of certain sortition on each PEC within respective single mandate electoral districts. However, September 13, 2012, shortly before the sortition, the CEC radically revised the procedure for sortition and with Resolution № 895 introduced the same mechanism of sortition which was used for the formation of DECs (see paragraph 4.1 of this Report).The negative impact on the formation of PECs in parliamentary elections in 2012 had the politicization of DECs’ work and their under control position in favor of certain parties, lack of acknowledgement of DEC members with the requirements of the electoral law, revision of procedure of the sortition on nominees to the PECs shortly before the sortition, as well as problems with the operation of IAS “The Elections”, which emerged in some DECs.These problems led to the fact that the formation of PSCs was accompanied by numerous problems: Submissions onnominees to the PSCs from several parties by the same person In the electoral district №22 (Volyn oblast) authorized under a power of attorney person Lyubov Grytsuk made submissions on nominees to PECs from several parties at a time, including the Social Patriotic Assembly of Slavs, the People's Labour Union of Ukraine, “Rus Yedyna” party, the Liberal Party of Ukraine, the Ukrainian Party “Zelena Planeta”, “Ruska Yednist” party, the Cossack Ukrainian Party, the Political Party of Small and Medium Businesses, National Ecological Party, “Rusky Blok” party, “Narodny Poryadok” party, the Democratic Party of Hungarians of Ukraine, the All-Ukrainian Workers Party, the Patriotic Party of Ukraine, “Bratstvo”, AUU “Centr”, “Vitchyzna”, and “Yedyna Rodyna”. Based on this it can be assumed that representatives of these parties in the PECs represented interests of one political force. Selective admission to sortitionof certainnominees to PECs To the DEC of the electoral district №23 (Volyn oblast) by some parties and candidates to people's deputies of Ukraine (“Rus Yedyna”, “Ruska Yednist”, “Rusky Blok”, “Derzhava”, “Zelena Planeta”, “Soyuz Anarkhistiv”, “Bratstvo”, “Yedyna Rodyna”, “Centr”) and a nominee Petro Khomych (Party of Regions) were submitted not all the statutory documents to include nominees to the PEC. But this didn’t become an obstacle to the admission of relevant candidates to the sortition. At the same time, in the electoral districts №№57 and 58 (Donetsk oblast) relevant DECs rejected submissions from opposition parties and factions (VO "Batkivshchyna", the People's Movement of Ukraine, “Gromadyanska Pozytsiya”, “Nasha Ukraina-Narodna Samooborona” faction) on the grounds of improper paperwork. This refusal was announced verbally - without providing relevant documents to representatives of nominees to PECs. At the meetings, during which DECs of the districts №№57 and 58 had to conduct sortition, representatives of AUU “Batkivshchyna” (including people’s deputies of Ukraine) tried to block the sortition. The conflict was resolved when the DECs voted to include submissions from the opposition and admit them to the sortition. Over-representationinPECs of little-known parties and “technical” candidates As with the DECs, the peculiarities of sortition on the inclusion of nominees to the PECs led to admission to PECs representatives of little-known parties and “technical” candidates. However, candidates who had a high chance of being elected and parties
popular in some districts didn’t get any representation in the PECs. Thus, in the electoral district №24 (Dnipropetrivsk oblast) to the PEC was not included any nominee from a candidate Y. Bezbah; in the electoral district №143 (Odessa oblast) V. Bodelan made 80 nominees to the PECs, but according to the sortition results won representation only in 3 PECs; in the electoral district №135 (Odessa oblast) AUU “Svoboda” has not won any representation in the PECs of the district. At the same time, in many districts representation in PECs won mentioned little-known parties – “Soyuz Anarkhistiv Ukrainy”, “Ruska Yednist”, “Rus Yedyna”, etc. Violationof the deadlines of the sortitiononnominees to PECs In some cases, sortition on nominees to the PECs were held by DECs with violation of the statutory deadlines. In particular, in the electoral district №107 (Luhansk oblast) until 22.00 on September 21, 2012, sortition on the proposed to the PECs candidates has not been started. A similar situation occurred in the electoral districts №№3, 211, 212, and 218. A record-breaker in terms of violation of the statutory deadlines of sortition on nominees to the PECs became the DEC of the electoral district №67 (Zhytomyr oblast) where the sortition on candidates was conducted only on September 25, 2012. After three sortitions, two of which were considered “training”, a head of the commission of the DEC №67 Domashenko could not put to a vote a resolution on the formation of 248 PECs of the district. According to representatives of AUU “Svoboda”, after this the sortition process was led by a head of the Chudniv Rayon State Administration and a candidate to deputy in the same electoral district - Samchyk. Distribution of executive positions in the PECs was conducted by the DEC of the district №67 before the end of the sortition, while on the representative of the opposition, who tried to prevent the violation of the law, was created a protocol on administrative violation. In the electoral district №61 (Donetsk oblast) there were held several repeated sortitions on nominees to the DECs because the DEC members for a long time were unable to determine the number of lots that were to put into the sortition drum. Some members of the DEC stated that the number of lots must include all nominees, including factions in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Others insisted that the number of lots should not include representation of the fractions. As a result of discussions, members of the DEC chose the second option, although during the same meeting of the DEC there were several recasting of the lots. In some cases (the electoral districts №№201, 211, 212, 218 Chernivtsi oblast and Kyiv city) delays in the sortition conduct were caused by problems in functioning of the CIAS “The Elections”. Conducting of the sortitions in a way that allowed select predefined nominates to PECs In some electoral districts the Committee of Voters of Ukraine recorded cases of conducting the sortitions in a way that allowed “choosing” predefined candidates based on the sortition results. For example, during sortition on nominees to the PECs in the electoral district № 9 (ARC) sortition envelopes differed in size and were stitched differently, allowing “choose” certain lots. In the Crimean electoral district №10 during the sortition envelopes were laid into the drum in two unequal stacks, the drum was not spun, and the envelopes were taken out from one of the stacks. At the same time, the attempt of the DEC members to check envelopes was blocked by the head of the commission. Violating deadlines of the formationof PECs According to the Law “On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”, the PECs should be formed in 31 days before the election day, that is before September 26 inclusive. Not all the DECs observed this period. In particular, late (September 27, 2012) decision to
form PECs was taken by the DECs in the electoral districts №№2, 115, 120, 121, 123, 125, and 141. In the electoral district №156 (Rivne oblast), the DEC held its meeting on the formation of the PECs on September 26, but due to technical errors on the formation of executive team of the PECs on same day the DEC members, without closing the meeting of the DEC, went away and made a decision on the formation of PECs only on September 27. However, as it was noted by one member of the DEC of the district №156, the DEC’s resolution on the formation of PECs within the electoral district was dated September 26, 2012, that is - backdated. Significantchanges inPEC‘s original membership Conducting a single draw on nominees for all PECs within each of the 225 constituencies, as well as admission of 87 parties, which are election process participants, and candidates in single-member districts to draw caused mass replacement of commission members immediately after their appointment in commissions. In some districts PEC's membership changed up to 70-80%. In result real control over the work of many PECs (with rare exceptions) was achieved by the Party of Regions. In election district №59 (Donetsk oblast) during September 25 - October 16, 2012 821 replacements in PECs took place that is 30% of the total number of commission members. The greatest number of replacements were made by The People's Movement of Ukraine (85 replacements), the Christian-Democratic Party of Ukraine (80 replacements), the European Party of Ukraine (68 replacements), Citizen Position (67 replacements) and others. The greatest rotations were made by parties with “technical” quota of “Batkivshchyna” and the party “UDAR”. However, replacements were made also by the satellites of the Party of Regions. For example, the party “Rus Bloc” made 36 replacements, “Brotherhood” - 32 replacements. PEC membership within Ternopil oblast has changed in about 70%, Lviv oblast - within 50%, Volyn oblast – 40-45%. PEC activities on providing preparation and conducting of elections As well as in situation with DECs, not all PECs held their ﬁrst meeting in terms speciﬁed with the Law "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine". Thus, in Khmelnytsky Oblast about 90% of PECs in election district number 187 held their meetings in time. In addition, some PECs conducted their meeting at DEC buildings as provided by Khmelnytsky Executive Council buildings for PECs were unsuitable for hosting meetings. Even worse situation took place in Kyiv city, Kyiv and Vinnitsa oblasts where only 60% of PECs held their meetings in time. In Kherson oblast first meetings of all PECs were conducted one day later due to the technical features of DEC computers and CEC server which collected all data on PEC memberships. The first meetings of many PECs of Kharkiv, Cherkasy, Luhansk and Mykolaiv oblasts were not carried out in time mainly due to lack of quorum. Level of material and technical provision of PEC depended on a particular region, but not always had been satisfactory. Among the major problems are PEC buildings, which were not adjusted for work, lack of telephones, computers, etc. For example, many PECs in election district № 132 (Mykolaiv oblast) were allocated in small buildings or in disrepair buildings. Buildings of PEC in election district № 196 (Cherkasy oblast) were not adapted to work or were in disrepair. In some PECs in election district № 107 (Luhansk oblast) location for issuing bulletins and location of polling booths were not connected. In election district № 116 (Lviv oblast) PECs needed extra telephone lines, 1 PEC needed safe, 4 PECs lights and flags of Ukraine. In October 2012 PEC № 010231 buildings (election district № 6) had no roof because there was held overhaul of the
roof. PEC №№ 010034 and 010038 (election district № 10 the Autonomous Republic of Crimea) had no locks on the doors, there were broken windowpanes indoors etc. In addition, approximately 10-15 Crimean PECs had no electricity for a long time. In Odessa oblast commission of PEC № 511100 (election district № 133) complained to a small space, lack of water, toilets, poor heating, and in PEC № 510183 (election district № 141) from the key from the PEC's room was always picked by the cleaner which caused problems with access to the room. In election district № 142 commission members who were not provided with safes or metal cabinets, kept election documents including preliminary voter lists at place of their residence or work (PEC №№ 510821, 510822, 510057, 510781). At PEC № 511331 (election district № 138, Municipal Institution "Odessa oblast hospital for WWII participants with disabilities") there was no telephone or telephone line. In addition, the vast majority of Odessa PECs, which were visited by representatives of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine, had no car, telephones, computer, printer, stand, first aid kit, fire extinguisher, ballot boxes, voting booths, stationery etc. At PEC № 5107170 located in the dormitory of Reni city was not equipped with anything except tables, 1 telephone, metal cabinet and stationary. We should mention that even in such difficult conditions commission members tried to comply with the law and brought to PECs own laptops, lights etc. For example, at PEC № 511331 the PEC Chairman brought from home the National flag of Ukraine. In the Rivne oblast Demidov State Administration informed the DEC of election district №154 on the list of PECs of the district which buildings do not meet the requirements established by the law. Among these PECs are PEC № 560157 (village Lishnya), № 560160 (village Demidovka), № 560167 (village Tovpyzhyn), № 560169 (village Vychavky), № 560170 (village Lysyn), № 560171 (village Lopavshe), № 560173 (village Naberezhne), № 560175 (village Berestechko), № 560179 (village Perekali). In some of these settlements buildings of PECs were almost twice smaller than stated in legislation norm. At many polling stations in rural areas of Ternopil, Khmelnytsky and Volyn oblasts there were no telephone line. Not all polling stations were equipped with copier, which made the process of making copies of protocols for candidates and observers more complicated. At some PECs of Ternopil oblast there were no stands, so publication of PEC decisions for public review was impossible. The level of transparency of PEC work often depends on level of their material and technical equipment, but in general it is much lower than the level of transparency of the DEC work. In cases when PECs were not provided with stands, decisions of commissions were kept in PEC and were provided for review on appeal of subject of election process. 6. COMPILING AND UPDATING OF VOTER LISTS The new law "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine" substantially changed the order of compilation and updating of voter lists, which was set in its previous version. Thus, a key role in compiling and updating voter lists was not given PEC and DEC, but to authorities of the State Register of Voters. The role of DEC in the process of voter registration has been minimized, although the law provides DEC with possibility to control authorized by the law agencies to comply legislation in compiling voter lists of PECs within the territories of the respective single-mandate constituencies, as well as to control that voter lists are accessible for public, the content of control powers was not defined with the Law. Another novelty of the Law was that on Election Day PEC had the right to make changes to the revised lists only on the basis of court decisions. Unlike the previous version of the law, the law does not provide the possibility of absentee voting;
appropriate procedure was changed with changing the place of voting without changes voting address. During the election process the CEC approved the resolution № 893, according to which the right to change temporary the place of voting without changing election address was narrowed to the electoral district of voter electoral address. Although the resolution № 893 significantly reduced the risk of mass "migration" of voters between constituencies to vote for a certain candidate for deputy, it seems rather doubtful that this resolution corresponds to the Law "On the State Register of Voters". In addition, the resolution does not fully meet the constitutional principle of equality of citizens before the law, since this resolution provides election commissions members the right to vote in districts which are not attributed their election addresses, while all other voters are not provided with this right. At the stage of compilation and updating of voter lists the Committee of Voters of Ukraine revealed a number of problems: Violation the terms of voter lists transfer from State Voter Register bodies to precinctelectioncommissions In most cases, the preliminary voter lists were submitted by the State Voter Register bodies to certain PECs in a statutory period. Certain violations of the terms occurred in Khmelnytsky, Lviv, Volyn and Vinnytsia oblasts. The main reason for delay was the inability to organize commission work due to the absence of the head, seals, or changes in PEC membership. Low quality of voter lists Despite the assurances of CEC representatives that database of the State Voter Register is high quality and contains a small percentage of errors, the CVU regional ofﬁces received considerable number of messages from citizens about the numerous ﬂaws in preliminary voter lists:
inclusion of so-called. "dead souls"; inclusion of "doubles"; non-inclusion into voter lists of citizens eligible to vote and those who voted at the polling stations during previous elections; inclusion into polling station lists demolished houses and buildings, buildings under construction, restaurants, shopping centers etc.
For example at PEC №511316 (election district №135) voter list included the building at Genoa st. 1, where the restaurant "Rush Hour" is located. Only within Vinnitsa (constituencies №№ 11-12) at 22 October 2012 there were 600 cases of inaccuracies in preliminary voter lists (about 280,000 voters are registered in the city). Deficiencies in work organization of the State Voter Register bodies In Rivne city (election district № 152) PEC members and voters informed the CVU that the Department of the State Register of Voters announced on the 22 October 2012 that deadline for receiving voters' applications on changes of preliminary voter lists and on temporary change voting place without changing voting addresses is 12:00, though October 22 was the last day for filing such applications and departments of SRV had to ensure admission of such applications at least until the end of the day, i.e. 18:00. In result it caused a queue of PEC members who came to submit applications on temporary change of voting address and failed to submit them.
Hotline of the CVU received a significant number of calls with reports that bodies of the State Register of Voters refused to accept applications of persons who were not registered anywhere, with a request to determine their voting address. Also there were cases of unmotivated refusal to accept applications for temporary change of voting place for persons who are staying on Election Day outside Ukraine. 7. PRE-ELECTION CAMPAIGNING AND MEDIA COVERAGE OF ELECTIONS One of the features of the new Law "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine" was completing it with a separate section to informing voters about the electoral process (Section VIII. Information Support for Elections). The law also stipulated a number of other innovations. Particularly:
deadline for publishing the results of public opinion polls on elections has been extended from 15 days before Election Day to 10 days before the Election Day; definition of pre-election campaign was slightly refined; restrictions on participation in the propaganda activities for public servants were liberalized (according to the Law public servants are not allowed to participate in campaigning only during working hours); advertising publications and other goods and services using names or pictures of candidates, names or brands of parties which are subjects of election process are considered to be political advertising; the possibility of campaigning by candidates in single-seat constituencies is included and mechanisms for ensuring equality of opportunity in the implementation of the candidates campaigning is secured; reasons to dismiss media from liability for the content of pre-election campaigning are expanded; limitations on the usage of official vehicles, subordinates, etc. by candidates for deputies for campaigning are specified.
At the same time there were no significant changes in the legal regulation of preelection campaign by electoral subjects. Thus, no clear distinction between pre-election campaign and official reports about actions the candidates who are public servants wasn't established, effective mechanisms to prevent shady campaign financing, indirect bribery of voters, the use of administrative resources for campaign activities etc. were not implemented . The law do not reflect a lot of recommendations of international election observation missions on the results of previous national election campaigns, for example in liberalization of regulation of private media, defining grounds for refusing in provision a right to reply, expansion of the list of sanctions that may be applied to media for violation of election laws and narrowing the grounds for license suspension or print edition limitations etc. In practical implementation of pre-election campaign we should highlight several negative trends: Campaigning in long time before the start of election process Major party started placing campaign materials in long time before the beginning of the election process. Pretty actively campaign materials were placed also by potential candidates in single-seat constituencies. The main reason was the lack of restrictions on political advertising before the election process, as well as (in terms of campaign activities of individuals) during the period between the beginning of the election process and candidates registration.
Political parties have suspended some promotional activities after the start of election process, but renew it after nominated candidates were registered, in some cases with even greater activities. A number of parties (Party of Regions, the Communist Party, "Batkivshchyna", and «Ukraina - vpered!") actively conducted campaign at all stages of the electoral process, while some parties (such as UDAR, "Svoboda") launched an active campaign only at late summer - early autumn 2012. Campaigning before registration of candidates in the national election district and single-seat constituencies increases the opacity of its funding, as funding is provides from other than the election funds, and such campaigning doesn't have any restrictions according to the Law "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine" . Content-poor campaign materials The content of political forces messages generally was of abstract or speculative nature and had little to do with the country's development prospects and existing problems. Thus, in June, in their campaign materials the Party of Regions initially focused on their role in overcoming the "ruins" left by predecessors and on their achievements in the field of infrastructure development; the united opposition focused on fact of their association and of the necessity to stop authorities etc.; "UDAR" stated that the policy can be pure and sincere; "Ukraine - Vpered" focused on their "primaries" which had a number of signs of political technology; the Communist Party of Ukraine focused on the left slogans (introducing a tax on luxury, on "return the country to people", etc.) and on the necessity to fight the corruption; "Svoboda" focused on fact they protect Ukrainians etc. The tone of campaigning in general has not changed in next months of election process. For example, the Party of Regions continued to criticize the "ruin" and "orange predecessors" (including V. Klitschko, who allegedly had to join "the orange team") and promised to go "from the stability to welfare"; "Batkivschyna" criticized the current government and promised to stop it. "Ukraina - vpered!" criticized the government and namely Azarov and have spread abstract slogans; "Nasha Ukraina" focused on language issues; the CPU promised to return the country people; "Svoboda" promised to change things for the benefit of the Ukrainians. However, UDAR and the Communist Party of Ukraine denounced voters more specific messages as well, such as promises to make lustration, to change the tax system, to restore free education and health care, decrease utility bills etc. However, mechanisms of achieving these goals were not disclosed in messages. Messages of political advertising for many candidates in single-seat constituencies had the same content quality. Mass placing hidden political advertising in the media The feature of the election campaign in 2012 was widespread hidden political advertising in the media. "Image" materials were actively placed by all participants of election process, but the most actively they were placed in favor of candidates in singleseat constituencies, Party of Regions and party "Ukraina – vpered!" Table 4. Some cases of hidden political advertising by subjects of election process РЕГІОН
Autonomous Republic Crimea
In July the state broadcasting channel GTRC "Crimea" and of information agency "KIA" (controlled by the Verkhovna Rada of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea) placed materials of hidden campaigning for the Party of Regions, the party "Ukraina vpered!", "Ukrainian choice" of Medvedchuk , and for the candidate Leo Mirimsky. Image materials were actively placed in the private medias, including TRC "ITV" CHTRK, TRC "Naples" newspaper "Crimean Pravda", "Crimean Telegraph," "Vecherniy Gorod", municipal publication "Southern Capital", state newspaper "Krymskie Izvestia". Donetsk oblast On July 19-20 the First Municipal Channel aired the documentary "The parliamentary elections in Ukraine in 2012", which highlighted the positive political prospects of Natalia Korolevska. Rivne oblast In July the regional issues placed 9 different in content and scope "image" materials about Oleg Chervonyuk, which highlighted his visit to China, his role in the revival of flax in Rivne and his support to Regional Hospital, namely 1000 sheets for patients which cost 50 000 UAH.
In August a candidate for people's deputy of Ukraine in election district № 154 Daniel Korylkevych actively placed image materials both in regional AND oblast newspapers. Thus, a publication entitled "The Politics of Good Deeds by Daniel Korylkevych" was dedicated to the presentation of his program in Zdolbuniv city and was published in "Rivne newspaper», № 34 (1103) of 23 August 2012. August 17 in three regional newspapers "Ridnyy Kray" (Strozhynetskyy region), "Karpaty" (Putilsky region), "Vizhnitsky horizons" (Vizhnitsky region) were printed identical in content materials for the candidate of Party of Regions in the election district № 202 Michael Bauer entitled "Why I participate in elections again ?". However only the newspaper "Ridnyy Kray" placed this publication under the heading remark "Political advertising."
Obstructionof campaigning and participationinelections Cases of obstruction in campaigning both before and after electoral process were massive. The number of such cases significantly increased with coming closer to Election Day. Obstruction of campaigning was held in the form of damage to outdoor advertising for parties or candidates, obstruction of campaign events, narrowing the possibilities of parties and candidates to have access to media and to outdoor advertising to place campaign materials. Table 5. Examples of obstruction of campaigning implementation REGION Autonomous Republic of Crimea
EXAMPLES In October (Ievpatoria, election district № 4) Ministry of Internal Affaires officials blocked the supply of concert equipment for a campaigning event of
the parliamentary candidate M. Kotlyarevsky. On 19th of October 2012 the court found the stadium, where the campaigning event was planned to be held, to be emergency dangerous and banned the event. Crimean republican committee of the Communist party of Ukraine announced that on 21st October in Krasnoperekopsk CPU activists were attacked by young men who introduced themselves as members of the Party of Regions. The police, in its turn, took no action to detain offenders. Parliamentary candidate in a single-mandate election district â„– 5 I. Sahaidak stated that local authorities of the city of Kerch intentionally obstructed his campaigning. According to him, an advertising company, with whom he signed a contract for outdoor advertising, removed billboards of the candidate, saying that they received instructions from the executive committee of the city council. In October, according to the parliamentary candidate of the election district â„– 16 O. Lantukh, on the 4th of October from 20 o'clock to 20:20 it was scheduled to broadcast his television campaigning program, paid with public funds, at the Vinnytsia oblast state television and radio broadcasting company channel VDT6. However, half an hour before the air, the rebroadcasting transmitter of the state oblast broadcasting company was turned off in Mohyliv-Podilsâ€™kyi, and the signal was renewed just before the end of the program. In September, the head of the Makiivka city committee of the Communist party of Ukraine V. Rudnieva made a statement about unjustified cancellation of the meeting of the party leader Petro Symonenko with students of Makiivka economic humanitarian institute. Two hours before the meeting, the Rector of the institute canceled it, referring to the recommendation from the city
department of education. In August, the party "UDAR" stated that the government influenced outdoor advertising operators decision not to place two ad posters on the occasion of the party leader Vitaliy Klitschko visiting Zaporizhzhya. According to self-nominated parliamentary candidate in the election district № 74 Petro Sabashuk, an official of Zaporizhzhya municipal investment agency, responsible for the issues related to the installation of outdoor advertising materials, forbade to place outdoor advertising of P. Sabashuk. In September in Berdyansk despite payments for advertising media, advertising materials of the party UDAR were removed. Besides, the parliamentary candidate from the party UDAR Iryna Gerashchenko stated that in Zaporizhzhya 18 billboards of this party were destroyed. In September in the Kiev oblast election headquarters of the party "UDAR" a statement was made that the campaign of their opponents aimed at destruction of the party UDAR campaigning had become massive. For example, in Brovary law enforcement officers illegally dismantled two campaigning party tents and confiscated all information materials they were spreading. In Fastiv, two billboards were cut off and black paint was poured at about 20 city-lights featuring the parliamentary candidate of the Party "UDAR" in the election district № 91 Ruslan Solvar. In Vyshgorod, the center of the election district № 96, three billboards of the parliamentary candidate of "UDAR" Dmitry Kreynin were cut off. Later in place of damaged campaigning advertising media, new billboards of the Party of Regions appeared. A candidate from AllUkrainian union "Batkivschyna" Oleg Kyshchuk suffers from intimidation and threats from unknown persons on a cell phone and verbally by officials of
the rayon state administration. According to the candidate in the village Kniazhychi of Brovary rayon where he resides, there was an attempt to set his house on fire with the use of a flammable mixture. On the 8th of September, in Brovary unknown persons stole his banners, which were installed at the crossroad of Kyivs’ka and Kirova streets, and on the 11th of September, in the center of the city Brovary police "pulled down" a campaigning tent of "Batkivschyna". Later it became known that the stolen campaigning products were taken to a department of municipal improvement of Brovary city executive committee. In Brovary district (village Svitylnia) village head forbade any campaigning for all parties except for the Party of Regions, and verbally ordered to remove all campaigning materials from mailboxes other than that of the ruling parties and its candidates. On 9th of August, the parliamentary candidate in the election district № 128 S. Isakov at a press conference stated that the authorities of the oblast state administration (Kruglov M. P.) through the deputy of Mykolaiv city council O. Omelchuk (supervises outdoor advertising in Mykolaiv in the Party of Regions) exerted pressure on the owners of advertising media with the demand to refuse from the agreements on the placement of S. Isakov’s campaigning materials. In October, workers of Ismail trading port and Danube shipping company (election district № 143) were prohibited to meet the leader of the Communist party of Ukraine P. Symonenko. An hour before the scheduled meeting with workers, the director of the Danube shipping company O. Dolgov orally explained that the meeting was canceled without giving the reason for such decision. In October, according to the parliamentary candidate from the party
SPAS in election district â„– 185 E. Kovalenko, the mayor of Kakhovka O. Karasevych and the chief of the local police precinct on the 18th of October 2012 obstructed campaigning of E. Kovalenko. In particular, campaigners distributed and stuck leaflets of the candidate in Kakhovka, and the mayor started to do remarks in sharp and rude manner, but campaigners ignored them. After this, the police was called out and one of the campaigners was detained. In August in Shepetivka, before the mass meeting the representatives of All-Ukrainian union "Batkivshchyna" addressed two municipal institutions with the demand to hold meetings in their buildings, but they received verbal refusal, and before the meeting itself, street cleaners were ordered to rip off stuck leaflets about the mass meeting all over the city and to remove invitations from mailboxes. In addition, in the center of Khmelnytskyi billboards of united opposition were spoiled, the slogan "We are united for the sake of the Homeland" on them was turned into "We are united for the treason of the Homeland." The infringers were not identified, although the opposition considered it to be a planned action of the ruling political forces. In September the parliamentary candidate in the election district â„– 193 of "Batkivschyna" R. Yarema stated that state officials obstructed his campaigning at the oblast state television broadcasting channel "Podillya-Tsentr" during the presentation of his election program. In September CVU registered cases of obstruction of citizens assemblies. In particular, Chygyryns'k city council refused, and then prevented the initiative group of local citizens to gather representatives of all political parties and parliamentary candidates in the election district â„– 195 in order to discuss the problems of the city and the district and the ways to solve
them. In August, city council of the city Storozhynets (election district № 202), filed a lawsuit to the court about interdiction for opposition parties to conduct on 23d-14th August celebratory actions and meetings with parliamentary candidates of the united opposition in the central square of the city. Executives of the city council explained it with the fact that at this time attractions needed to be installed in the square. In September, the pressure was exerted on D. Bielik, the candidate of the party "Rus’kyi block" in singlemandate election district № 224. On the 3d of September, representatives of Gagarynsk district administration, a police officer and chiefs of district "\Zhylservis” (residential service) № 23 for half an hour were trying to get into the apartment of the head of housebuilding complex № 99, with whom Dmitry Bielik had an official agreement about renting an advertising construction on a house wall at the address POR, 22, with the request to remove promotional materials. On the 10th of September officials from Prosecutor’s office and Ministry of internal affaires broke the doors of the apartment belonging to D. Bielik and made an attempt of searching it. The time of search coincided with the time when D. Bielik was making a speech in the Sevastopol city council. At night on the 19th of September campaigning materials of D. Bielik were destroyed at 14 billboards. Also, according to the candidate, representatives of some advertising companies owning billboards were called to the city council with the requirement to break contracts with D. Bielik under the threat of non-renewal of a license or physical destruction of media.
Although the cases of politically based pressure on candidates during the election campaign were not systemic, they were registered in many regions and consisted mainly in obstructing the campaigning activities (see above) or pressure on business connected with parliamentary candidates. In particular, in Mykolaiv oblast (election district № 132) during October pressure was exerted at "Agrofirma Kornatskyh" (Limited liability company), which belonged to the parliamentary candidate of the united opposition A. Kornatsky. As a result of the pressure the candidate had to leave the territory of Ukraine. Separate cases of similar pressure were registered also in Luhansk and Cherkassy oblasts. In Kherson oblast (election district № 186) on the 18th of October 2012 law enforcement bodies searched the premises of the market and the house of the parliamentary candidate F. Nehoy. The parliamentary candidate V. Shklyar (Autonomous Republic of Crimea, election district № 3) also informed about the increase of the pressure on his business from law enforcement bodies. In Kyiv oblast during October tax authorities inspected the activity of the agroindustial firm belonging to the parliamentary candidate in the single-mandate election district № 92 V. Hudzenko - rival to the candidate of the ruling force S. Kashuba. In Bila Tserkva precinct during September the pressure was exerted on two highly rated candidates Lyudmyla Dryhalo (candidate of the People's party) and a single candidate from AllUkrainian union "Svoboda" and the United opposition Oleksandr Marchenko. The pressure consisted in conducting inspections by controlling authorities (revenue service, firefighters, occupational health and safety management, Sanitary-epidemiological inspection service and others) of activities of enterprise structures controlled by the candidates. Lyudmyla Dryhalo’ factory of half-finished meat products and Olexandr Marchenko’s granite quarry were checked. In Zaporizhzhia oblast on the 1st of August tax police initiated a criminal case against self-nominated candidate Petro Sabashuk (election district № 74). Although prosecutors demanded a preventive measure in the form of detention, the court chose as a preventive measure a deposit of 17 000 UAH. All the property of P. Sabashuk was arrested. As Sabashuk did not cease his participation in the election campaign, in September prosecutors demanded to change the preventive measure and to impose a bail of 4 million hryvnas on the candidate. The massive use of "black PR" Unethical ways of campaigning were actively used both before the beginning of the election process and during its course. For example, in June 2012, in Ren, Odessa Oblast (election district № 143) during the celebration of the Youth Day unidentified persons distributed leaflets entitled "Life and work of Sashko Dubovyi." Leaflets contained discrediting information about O. Dubovyi. The cases of distribution of leaflets aimed at discrediting the Communist party of Ukraine were also registered in the same month in Luhansk oblast. In July, the number of cases of "black PR" use increased substantially. Thus, in Ladyzhyn (election district № 17, Vinnytsia region) the newspaper of the city council "Our Town" launched an information war against the potential candidate at that time, D. Zabolotny, and the civic organization "City." In Kyiv oblast there were publications containing "black PR" against V. Klitschko and potential candidates from his party. In particular in Yahotyn, Zhurivtsi, Brovary and many other cities of the oblast leaflets were
distributed aimed at discrediting V. Klitschko and potential candidates from the party "UDAR." For example, in Brovary false newspaper was distributed allegedly on behalf of the NGO "Hroza", headed by the potential parliamentary candidate from the party "UDAR" Pavlo Rizanenko. Materials were published there on P. Rizanenko's involvement in drug trafficking, a false statement of the party "UDAR " about the refusal to nominate P. Rizanenko a parliamentary candidate. "Black PR" was also rather actively used in Odessa oblast. Thus, in the beginning of July in Odessa leaflets were distributed against Vitaliy Klitschko, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, Nataliya Korolevska and Oleg Tyahnybok. In one of those leaflets they were compared with the leaders of the UPA (Ukrainian insurgent army), in the other - with Hitler, Mussolini and Stepan Bandera. On the 14th of July in Izmail a mass action was organised against a potential candidate Yuriy Kruk under the slogan "thanks to the residents of Donbass for the deputy krukanas", during which leaflets were distributed against Yu. Kruk. In Zaporizhzhya oblast "black PR" was actively used against opposition leaders. For example, the regional state broadcasting channel (channel ZTRK "Zaporizhzhya") aired a movie about Yulia Tymoshenko, in which she and her work were shown in a negative way. In L’viv oblast videos containing ads against A. Lopushanskyi were spread. In the election district № 115 (Sykhiv) on the 15 th of July 2012 there were stuck bills, on which it was indicated that Dmytro Dobrodomov (candidate from the "UDAR" and general producer of the channel "ZIK") was the grandson of an employee of the NKVD. On the 3d of July 2012 in Zhytomyr leaflets appeared depicting the Head of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine V. Lytvyn among grandmothers with the text: "Mom, I sold our language!" CVU registered numerous cases of "black PR" in the next months of the election campaign. For example, in August in Ivano-Frankivsk oblast in election district № 86 there were distributed leaflets of the candidate V. Kredisov against the candidate V. Hrabovetsky. In the same oblast (election district № 83) leaflets were distributed with animated images of a horned owl and the words "using chicken blindness SYCHI (horned owls) fool everyone" and "BYuT-thieves." In this context it is worth noting that the parliamentary candidate in the election district was O. Sych, nominated by AllUkrainian union "Svoboda". In the election district № 89 fake leaflets of the Movement CHESNO (honestly) against the opposition candidate Vasyl Gladiy were distributed. In Zaporizhzhya oblast, the newspaper "Zaporozhskoe vremya", which is included to the media holding of the Party of Regions, each week distributed false information about candidates from the party "UDAR". In Khmelnytsky oblast on the 19-20th of August 2012 in all district centers of the election district № 189 there were registered cases of sticking leaflets without any source data, aimed at discrediting the All-Ukrainian union "Svoboda" and a single candidate from the opposition forces in the election district Ihor Sabiy. The leaflets were stuck at the same time with visits of the leader of "Svoboda" Oleg Tyahnybok to the respective district centers. In September 2012, in the city of Yampil, Vinnytsya oblast, there were registered cases of "black PR" against the parliamentary candidate Oksana Kaletnyk. Leaflets with the picture of Oksana Kaletnyk, the logo of the Foundation "Bat’kivska zemlya (Father land)" and signed "Oksana Kaletnik, thief, crook, trash-spy" were pasted on a pillar near the market in Yampil. In different cities of Donetsk oblast in the same month a newspaper "Svobodnoe slovo Donbassa (The free word of Donbass)" was distributed, which showed in a negative way activities of all political forces except the Party of Regions. In Kyiv and Kyiv oblast activists of the party "UDAR" in September found
swindlers, who on behalf of brothers Klitschko offered to the residents of Kyiv and the oblast to participate in a questionable educational program and to buy for that a set of educational materials worth 6 thousand hryvnas each. In Kherson oblast on the territory of the election district № 183 there were registered facts of spreading the newspaper "Chesnok (garlic)" with false source data, which was allegedly published by the regional branch of the movement "Chesno (Honestly)". The newspaper placed defamatory material about the candidate of the party UDAR Andriy Putilov. In Odessa oblast on the 22 of September 2012 at night in the city Rozdilna (election district № 139) the city block of Lenin and Chervonoarmiys’ka streets was stuck up with leaflets entitled "Presman-bandit" (Olexandr Presman was the candidate of the Party of Regions in this precinct). In the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (cities Dzhankoy and Krasnoperekopsk) immediately after the visit of the leader of "UDAR" leaflets were distributed without source data, aimed at exposing the "orange" past of V. Klitschko. In Zaporizhzhya oblast leaflets were distributed against the opposition in the nationwide and single-mandate constituencies. They depict their picture and the inscription "Who prepares a stroke on Ukraine?", "Thieves are coming" etc. In L’viv oblast the newspaper "Express" published information about the conviction of the candidate Dubnevych, the newspaper "Animous" published pictures of the alleged agreement between the candidate Kanivets with the Presidential Administration, as well as distributed information in the Internet that Andriy Tyahnybok in the 9th grade allegedly killed a child. In Zboriv district of Ternopil oblast (election district № 165) unknown persons in September damaged campaigning materials of the self-nominated parliamentary candidate Ivan Tchaikivs’kyi. In his campaigning leaflets unknown persons attached a label depicting a pig and the words "Caution! Hrun of regions." Use of state resources for campaigning, PR onstate programs 2012 election campaign feature is unprecedented (at least since 2006) level of state ofﬁcials' and local self-government ofﬁcials' involvement in campaigning activities. In particular, in September in Zaporizhzhya oblast heads of rayon administrations and corresponding administration departments were always present at meetings of candidates in deputies of Party of regions with voters. In particular, Committee of voters of Ukraine registered fact of campaigning of head of Berdyansk Rayon state administration Chepurny in favor of candidate in deputy Valery Baranov on an opening of a children playground in one of the rayon villages. In Zhytomyr oblast the same month head of department of culture and tourism of Zhytomyr oblast state administration Yury Gradovsky who is lead singer of “Drevlyany” band participates during his work hours in concerts in support of the self-nominated candidate in deputy in single-mandate election district number 67 Viktor Razvadovsky. In Chernivtsi oblast on September 1st Novodniestrovsk city council secretary Nikolai Lutchak during First Bell festival opening ceremonies at the local high school openly campaigned for a candidate Artem Semeniuk (nominated by the party of Regions in election district № 204). On September 16th, 2012 staff personnel of state authority of the State Fire station number 8 (Sokyriany) of territorial department Ministry of Emergencyn of Ukraine in Chernivtsi region, instead of directly performing their duties were pllacing on the billboard political ads with the words "To revive and to develop. Semeniuk Artem" for candidate Artem Semeniuk (nominated by the party of Regions in election district № 204) with the use of special equipment. In Ternopil oblast, where N. Hoptyan, wife of oblast administration head was self-nominated in singlemandate election district number 66, in villages and
towns of the region the so-called "meeting with activists of local government" are organized, used by management of district administrations to actively campaign for N.Hoptyan during their working time. In Donetsk oblast head of Donetsk regional state administration Andriy Shishatskiy continuosly conducted joint official events with candidates for deputies from the Party of Regions, nominated in single-mandate constituencies. In Odessa oblast candidates actively used for PR local programs ("People's Budget" etc), which were used to form Party o fRegions' positive image as a whole as well as individual candidates from the Party of Regions in single-mandate constituencies (Gennady Trukhanov, Leonid Klimov, Ivan Fursin, Alexander Presman, Vitaly Barvynenko, Igor Plokhy, Yuriy Kruk, Yuriy Presnov). In election district № 136 the candidate for Deputy G. Truhanov used a special state program to provide disabled with wheelchairs for campaigning for himself. Promotion of the candidate is based on the fact that the candidate arranges delivery of wheelchairs from the manufacturer directly to home of disabled. Yuriy Crook makes his agitation based on funds allocated for the city Reni to cover the consequences of flood which happened in Reni at spring 2012. In particular, workers engaged in road works within the state program are wearing vests labeled "Yuriy Kruk", thereby misleading voters about the real finance source of the road works. In Donetsk oblast in the campaign materials of candidate in deputy from the Party of Regions in the election district № 45 Yuriy Zviahliaskiy it was stated that due to his support reconstruction of the secondary school № 61 (Kyivsky region of Donetsk) was included into the national project "School of the Future ". Not only local state officials, but also heads of central executive institutions were involved in campaigning in favor of certain political parties and candidates. In particular, minister of education, science, sport and youthof Ukraine D. Tabachnik has visited Slovyansk city in Donetsk oblast. The minister met with teachers and students of Slovyansk college of national aviation university and Donbass state pedagogical university. Local mass media stated that this visit became possible thanks to leader of civic organisation “Our region”, candidate of party of regions in election district № 47 О. Azarov. On 7 September 2012, Prime Minister of Ukraine Mykola Azarov has opened a new sports complex with swimming pool, gym and fitness rooms in the renovated Park of Culture and Rest named after H.I.Petrovsky (election district № 44). During this event the government representatives noted the achievements of the Party of Regions and its local leaders in the renewal of local infrastructure. Indirectvotebuying Article 61 of the Law On Elections of peple's Deputies of Ukraine directly prohibits
money handouts or distribution for free or on preferential terms of commodities, works, services, securities, loans, lottery tickets, or other material benefits to the voters, establishments, institutions, organizations, or members of election commissions by an organization whose founder, owner, or administrative body member is an MP candidate, a party that has nominated MP candidates, or an official of that party. Provisions of this article are specified in article 74 of the Law, which also prohibits campaigning combined with distribution of material values. As soon as electoral subjects only may be brought to justice for indirect vote buying, many citizens who planned to nominate themselves for elections
has started indirect vote buying long before official start of the election campaign. After the beginning of the election campaign number of indirect vote buying cases became slightly lower, but increased again in the following months. It was mainly caused by the fact that there are no other sanctions against candidate or party which practice vote buying except a notice from CEC. Use of electoral funds affiliated with candidates in deputies for indirect vote buying became one of 2012 campaign features. It should be also noted that indirect vote buying was practiced mainly by candidates in single-mandate election districts and not by parties, though Committee of voters of Ukraine has registered cases of indirect vote buying by parties as well. Table 6. Examples of indirect vote buying REGION Kyiv city
Zakarpattya oblast Kyiv oblast
EVENT In election district number 212 in Kyiv city I. Balenko distributed 7% discount card of “Furchet” shops for free among his voters. By decision of the Kyiv Administrative Court of Appeal of 16.09.12 I.Balenko was obliged to stop his vote-buying activities. V. Razvadovsky (election district № 67) has bought from his own money 2000 sets “Set of firstgrader” comprising: scheme of sentence, audio analysis of a word, set of geometry figures. The sets were distributed ampng departments of education of Lubar, Romaniv, Chudniv, Zhytomyr rayons and Zhytomyr city to be granted to first-graders. M. Rudchenko (People's party, election district № 66) provided money for change of windows, installation of gates and purchase of chairs to Korostyshyv school №1. Korostyshyv school №2 yard was paved with support of the candidate. For school №3 people's deputy has given money for change of windows, changing roof and development of documentation for construction of new premises for classes. On May 25th 2012 deputy of oblast council from the Party of regions S. Derkach distributed in educational institutions greetings with attached top-up vouchers for cell phones . Head of oblast state administration A. Prysyazhnyuk presented fifteen travel package vouchers to Greece and Crites to students of Stalutynsky liceum who represented the liceum on olympiades and competitions. More then 400 children revitalized on the seaside in sanatorim “Olvia” (Ochakiv city, Mykolaiv oblast) in month and a half of summer season with financial support of “mecenates” of Party of regions in Kyiv-Svyatoshyn district of Kyiv city. In Zhovkiv rayon (election district № 122) local deputy, ex-official of customs and tax administrations T. Kozak distributed among parishioners and students a “Prayer book for school children and students”. On one side of the cover there was a religious-theme
Ternopil oblast Kharkiv oblast Khmelnytsky oblast
picture and on the other — photo of T. Kozak. Candidate in deputy Vadym Chorny (self-nominated in election district № 133) organised potatoes sale not for market price (3,5 hryvnas), but much cheaper (1,95 hryvnas). Potatoes were sold in tents with the name of the candidate indicated. Similar practice was used in Autonomous Republic of Crimea where icecream was sold for “soviet prices” (15 kopiyka) during the visit of P. Symonenko. Representatives of one of the candidates in people's deputies of Ukraine V. Chubak distributed warm winter socks in villages of Borschiv rayon (election district № 167). Sertificates for cosmetics were distributed in the name of I. Gorina in the beginning of May. Candidate in people's deputy of Ukraine in election district № 191 and in the same time acting deputy Vasyl Shpak organised on September 9 distribution of eyeglasses to school children and pensioneers of Starosynyavsky rayon, in particular, to residents of villages Grechana, Adampil, Paplyntsi. B. Gubsky distributed flesh-drives among graduates, and S Tereschuk distributed packages with aster and corn seeds. Representative of united opposition A. Bondarenko distributed DVDplayers in state institutions. In 2011-2012 candidate in deputy I. Rybakov purchased school buses for Dmytriv school in Bakhmach rayon, Spas school in Sosnytsya rayon and a school in krukivka rayon center, and also opened a bridge through Uday river in Varvyn rayon of the oblast.
It is worth mentioning that indirect vote buying was mainly practiced in a form of goods distribution and services provision. As for the goods, electoral process subjects mainly disseminated foodstaff packages among voters, though some candidates before or after their registration by CEC distribuded more unusual presens. In particular, in Chernihiv oblast packages with poison against colorado beetle were distributed on the territory of the oblast in the name of ex-head of Chernihiv oblast state administration. People's deputy and candidate on 2012 elections G. Kaletnyk (Vinnytsya oblast) presented inflated trampoline to children of Syvakivtsi village of Lypovets rayon; to center of hyppotherapy of Bratslav village — a saddle, and also promised to provide four horses with oat. In Ternopil oblast an interesting way of indirect vote buying was used by one of majoritarian candidates Ivan Chaikivsky: he proposed villagers to take for free piglets that he will then buy from them for 20 hryvnas of live weight, which is more expensive then ordinary purchase prices for pork. In the name M. And P. Yurchyshyn (heads of AN NVP “Visit”) voters in Vinnitsa oblast were proposed to “taste diary products of AN NPV “Visit” and express their opinion". In order not to let distribution of cheese and butter look like bribery, a “consumer questionnaire” was added to a foodstaff package. EXAMPLES OS SERVICES PROVISION BY CANDIDATES IN DEPUTIES Volyn oblast. Stepan Ivakhiv (election district № 21) has initiated through his fund an energy-saving program, which provided 11 schools and kindergartens of Kovel with
plastic windows, and local medical and obstetric posts – with equipment. Rivne oblast. D. Korylkevych through his fund «Love Ukraine» supported social initiatives in election district № 154 (Dubno, Radyviliv, Zdolbuniv, Mlyniv, Demydiv rayons), in particular — competition of school camps, distributed grants and material assistance. Sumy oblast. Party of Regions established a shcool of young deputy assistant, introduced English language courses for voters and “hot line of regionals”, opened public reception offices, introduced initiative “Public general plan” - collection of propositions for reform of Sumy general plan. Candidates were rather active in stimulating voters to support them by providing works and services to them as well. In partucular, I. Movchan, first deputy of Vinnitsa oblast state administration and deputy of Vinnitsa oblast council provided 11 thousands of hrivnas on establishment of a playground in Obuhiv village of Murovanokurilovetsky rayon. On August 6 secretary of Chernivtsi city council Vitaly Mikhailyshyn (nominated by the Party of Regions in election district № 201) presented children playground with an inscription “Fulfill children dreams. Vilaly Mikhailyshyn”. In Khmelnitsky oblast Sergiy Buriak (electoral district #190) opened children playground which cost 63 000UAH in Slavuta as a part of his social program "Aiming for better future together". The candidate also promised to build one more playground in the town by the day of the city celebration. Children of Shepetivka city of the same electoral district were also lucky two more playgrounds were opened there. In particular, MP P. Lebedev invested in improvement of central alley in Inkerman city (Sevastopol). MP and potential candidate in №60 (Donetsk oblast) V. Bevzenko invested in reparation of voter supply system at one of Volnovakha city streets. Yu. Kruk was busy with reconstruction of a road “ReniIzmail” (election district № 143, Odessa oblast). Conduction of Euro-2012 football championship was also used as an occasion for campaigning combined with features of indirect vote-buying. In particular, in Zhytomyr oblast M. Tymoshenko (Communist party of Ukraine, election district № 64) bough football uniforms for Korosten' city football team. In Ivano-Frankivsk oblast charitable foundation of V. Kredisov (election district № 86) presented football uniforms to Tysa village of Dolyna rayon football team. Number of cases of indirect vote buying significantly increased in connection with celebration of state and professional holidays — Constitution Day, Independence day, Day of knowledge, day of medical worker etc. Table 7. Examples of campaigning with features of indirect vote buying in connection with Day of medical worker REGION
On the eve of Medical worker day six ambulancies and four departments
oblast Donetsk oblast
of central rayon hospital received portative cardiographs as a gift from G. Kaletnik. Besides, he presented Peugeot ambulance car cost 227,7 thousand hryvnas to Nemyriv rayon. Народний депутат України і кандидат у виборчому окрузі № 49 MP and potential candidate in election district № 49 (Donetsk oblast) D. Omelyanovych presented keys of “Sense” passenger cars to representatives of Kostyantynivka and Krasnoarmiysk rayons, as well as Kostyantynivka and Druzhivka cities. MP and potential candidate in election district №46 S. Kluev presented certificates on 100 000 UAH to two medical institutions. V. Razvadovsky (All-Ukrainian Chornobyl People's Party, election district № 67) presented 500 sets of tonometers, stethoscopes and electronic thermometers to medical institutions.
Zaporizhz hya oblast
MP O. Baburin (Communist party of Ukraine, election district № 74) presented medical equipment cost more then 10 000 UAH to city children's hospital № 1. Lviv oblast S. Senchuk (“Edyny Tsentr”, election district № 119) provided all medical and obstetric stations of Radekhiv rayon with drugs. Ternopil M. Luyshnyak (UDAR, election district № 166) presented a medical oblast spreader to Monastyksk rayon hospital. Kherson MP O. Zhuravko presented a refrigerator to obstetrical department oblast Tsuryupinsk rayon hospital and electric tea-kettles to Chaplinka rayon hospital. As indicated before, indirect vote buying was often practiced by charitable foundations, affiliated with certain candidates in deputies. Examples of such foundations activities are listed below. EXAMPLES OF VOTERS' STIMULATION BY CHARITABLE FOUNDATIONS AFFILIATED WITH CANDIDATES IN DEPUTIES Kyiv city. Charitable foundation of Igor Lysov “My native city” together with Goloseevo rayon state administration started active systematic works on municipal improvement of territories, pavement of roads, reparation of entrance halls and stores in Goloseevo rayon. Autonomous republic of Crimea. From mid-May a fund of Party of Regions MP P.Lebedev financed free of charge medical examination for residents of Balaklava rayon, and also distributed necessary pills (election district № 224). Donetsk oblast. Charitable foundation of MP Ihor Shkirya (election district №52, Dzerzhynsk city) announced in July start of a program for children revitalization. Charitable foundation “Humanity” headed by MP Tetian Bahteeve (election district №42, Donetsk city) financed a program of dolphin therapy for handicapped children. Party of Regions candidate Oleksii Azarov was especially active in the region (particularly in electoral district #47). Charitable organization “Oleksii Azarov’s Initiative “Our Region” (registered just 20.07.2012) provided citizens with goods and services. On August 14th during the launch of gas pipeline in Andriivka (Slovyansk rayon) employees of gas services received mobile phones from this organization. Also this non-profitable orgazition started social project “Health of our region” providing visits of
doctors to different local communities. This project is promoted as a free opportunity to receive diagnostic medical services. Ivano-Frankivsk oblast. Charitable foundation of Vyacheslav Kredisov (election district № 86) provided Bolekhiv city hospital with a PC and 7 electric boilers. Besides, a concert was organised for medical workers of Rozhnyatov rayon. At the concert, the foundation distributed financial assistance among veterans of medical sphere. Ambulatory of Rozsilna village of Bogorodychany rayon received presents from the foundation as well — it were set of furniture and medical equipment. Fund of Yury Derevyanko («Фронт змін», election district № 87) continued its activities, presenting books to village libraries, in particular — to a library of Pniv village of Nadvirna rayon. It is interesting to note that co-head of the Fund V. Grabovetsky, fellow of Yury Derevyanko is also actively using Fund resources for PR in another election district (№ 86). Particularly, in June 2012 he provided Dolyna city children's hospital with 7 tables for nappy changes, and Maksymivna and Angelivka villages of Dolyna rayon medical and obstetric stations, as well as ambulance of Yasen village of Rozhnyatyn rayon with new equipment. Luhansk oblast. Charitable fund “Blagovist”, connected with potential candidate V. Tikhonov, provided services to citizens, while charitable fund of potential candidate V. Goncharov provided installation of new medical equipment, Fund “For Future” ruled by potential candidate O. Kunchenko provided gifts and services to veterans. Poltava oblast. Campaigning with features of indirect vote-buying was held by civic organization “Our home Poltava”, founded by Poltava city mayor О. Mamay and headed by potential candidates V. Zaluzhny and O. Makar, and also Party of Regions. Sumy oblast. In the mass media there were lots of information on the Fund of A.Volkov (Batkivschyna) - from giving playgrounds and computers to distributing vodka with candidate's photo on the bottle. Volkov himself on one of the press conferences stated that had left the Fund long time ago. However, it does not prevent the Fund to be called his name. Kharkiv oblast. Fund of A. Girshfeld presented settlements of Krasnograd and Sakhnovysche rayons new refrigirators. Directvotebuying In Volyn oblast regional office of the Committee of voters of Ukraine registered actions with features of indirect vote-buying. In particular, residents of Kivertsi city and Kivertsi rayon informed that there are preparations for vote buying for Ihor Eremeev (election district № 23) on upcoming elections to Verkhovna Rada. Those willing to sell their vote receive 200 UAH and said that after voting for the candidate they will receive the same amount. Their passport information and number of identification code are collected. On 27 on June Kivertsi rayon council had even supported an inquiry of deputy Ihor Kosmyna (“Svoboda”), head of a commission on deputies activities and ethics голови, obligance of human rights, freedom of conscience, legality and crime control to General prosecutor of Ukraine, prosecutors of Volyn oblast and Kivertsi rayon with a request to check facts of vote-buying by businessman Ihor Eremeev. According to information from head of united opposition Vinnitsa oblast headquarters “Batkivschyna” L.
Scherbakovska, heads of some village councils unite voters with a system of network marketing: each voter receives about 1000 hryvnas for voting for particular party or candidate, if the voter bring one more person ready for vote under such condition, he receive 200 hryvnas more, and the new voter receives 1000 hryvnas. To prove fact of voting voters allegedly would receive mobile phones to make photoes of ballot papers, take them out after filling in on polling station and give to other voters. In Mogyliv-Podilsky city (Vinnitsa oblast) meeting of Oksana Kaletnyk “supporters were organised”. Access to the meeting was granted only according to the list of participants. Those present signed papers that they are “supporters of O.Kaletnyk's activities” and received 50 hryvnas. According to CVU assesment, these meeting was aimed at forming a network of vote buying in election district №16. In Chernivtsi oblast on 17 September 2012 candidate in deputy Ruslan Panchyshyn (election district № 204) stated that he had received information from reliable sources that the settlements of the region direct votebuying is practiced. According to him, in every village district there are established groups of people who go door-to-door and offer UAH 150 per vote. For the money, the person must submit his or her passport number, copy of identification code and put a signature in the box to support the corresponding candidate. This signature will supposedly guarantee that voters will vote for the right candidate. A curious incident occurred in Slavuta city (Khmelnytsky oblast), where a meeting of Sergey Buryak with voters was scheduled. Candidate himself was not at the meeting, but by its end participants happened to get sealed envelopes with 500 UAH inside each envelope. However, hastily tearing the lateral edges of their envelopes, voters spoiled money because bills were placed in expanded form on the right side of the envelope. In Odessa oblast features of obstruction to voting rights realisation by vote-buying were present at an action of V.Chorny, when hi proposed to pay 1600 hryvnas to each adult resident of Kyiv rayon of Odessa city in case he would win in parliamentary elections. The candidate stressed that the payment will be made no matter for whom had the voter casted his vote. Similar campaigning was practiced in single-mandate election district № 90 for candidate V. Chudnovsky (Kyiv oblast). In order to raise number of his supporters he established a system of financial stymulation of voters with a help of network marketing. Distribution of money was done in social centers of V. Chudnovsky, situated in microrayons of Bila Tserkva city, and then moved to candidate's tents. Participants of Chudnovsky's network went door-to-door as well and proposed voters to take 100 hryvnas. Other violationof electoral legislationrequirements concerning campaigning During the election process Committee of voters of Ukraine registered many violation of the election campaign procedures, in particular — placement of campaigning materials on public transport, state authorities and state institutions buildings etc. In particular, in Volyn oblast on September 12, 2012 there were reported violations of campaigning procedures by candidate of the united opposition Eugen Melnyk in the election district number 19 – communal enterprise of Novovolynsk City Council placed his campaign posters inside its premises,which is prohibited by paragraph four of article 74 of the Law On Parliamentary Elections. In the same oblast on September 27, 2012 in the lobby of the Volyn Regional State Administration political advertising from one of the parliamentary candidates in the election district number 21 Stepan Ivahiv was recorded. The advertisement looked as an announcement of the match between teams "Continuum- Volyn University" (Lutsk city) and "Orbit-ZTMK-News" (Zaporizhzhay city) on XXII championship of women's super league of Ukraine in volleyball, which will take place in Lutsk. Candidate in election district №21 Stepan Ivahiv invited to the event, and
there was his photo on the adverticement. In Ivano-Frankivsk oblast campaign materials are placed in hospitals: O.Sycha (VO "Svoboda") in Ivano-Frankivsk on transport; in transport: P.Shkutyak and V.Brus (election district number 86) — in Dolyna city and M . Pitsuryaka (election district number 87) — in Nadvirna city. 8. ORGANISATION AND CONDUCTION OF VOTING Provisions of the law On Elections of the People's Deputies of Ukraine in part of preparation to voting, organisation of voting and vote tabulation were not subject to significant changes in comparison with the previous Law wording. Changes were mainly caused by introduction of mixed electoral system. Among the Law novels, the following should be noted: cutting of voting time, provision of the right to vote for voters who are near the PEC premises at 8 pm on E-Day, necessity to prove the ground for homevoting by paper from medical facility etc. Results of Committee of voters of Ukraine official observers' monitoring of voting give grounds for a statement that as a whole the voting was organised in accordance with the election law requirements, though a number of problems were reveled in the course of its organisation and conduction (however non-sustematic): Substitutions incommissions’ compositions before electionday In Cherkasy oblast (election district № 198, Smila city), the night before election day the DEC substituted about 200 members of precinct election commissions, whereas commissions’ members were not informed beforehand. For example, 7 members of PEC №710 238 of the election district № 198 learnt that they had been substituted just before the beginning of the vote when newly appointed members of PEC were already present at the polling station. The meeting where the decision about substitution of PEC members was taken, was held at 23:30 on the 27th October 2012, the head and deputy head of the DEC of the election district № 198 being informed about substitutions only before the beginning of the vote. Discrepancies between the number of voters in corrected lists and the number of ballot papers received by electioncommissions At some polling stations official observers of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine registered discrepancies in the number of voters in corrected voters lists and the number of ballot papers received by PECs. Thus, in Cherkasy oblast (election district № 197) at the special polling station № 710 901, formed at the district hospital, the voters list included 88 people, although the Commission of this polling station received 504 ballot papers. In Volyn oblast (election district № 23) at the polling stations №№ 072 729, 072 725, 072 731 the amount of ballot papers for voting in the nationwide multimandate electoral district which were sent to PEC from respective polling stations appeared to be smaller than the number of citizens having the right to vote on parliamentary elections who were included to corrected voters lists. A similar situation occurred in Kharkiv oblast (election district № 173) where the DEC of the polling station № 631 679 received less ballot papers than it was indicated in the corrected voters list. DEC of the election district № 173 tried to solve the problem by sending to the PEC additional number of ballot papers, but they were locked in the safe and were not given to the members of the PEC. In Donetsk oblast the number of available ballot papers was less than the number of voters in corrected lists at two polling stations - № 141 653 (election district № 42), where for voting in the nationwide electoral district there were 19 ballot papers less than the number of voters at the polling station, the same as at the polling station № 141 494 (election district №51), where PEC was in lack of 13 ballot
papers. In Vinnytsya oblast 95 % of polling stations of all constituencies of the oblast lacked from 18 to 150 ballot papers. In Odessa oblast (election district № 136) at the special polling station № 511 427 the number of ballot papers significantly exceeded the number of voters in the voters list – 222 voters were included to the list, while the PEC received 372 ballot papers of each type. In Rivne oblast at the special polling station № 154 of the single-mandate election district № 154 55 people were included to the voters list. However, the DEC sent to the PEC of this polling station ballot papers only for 36 voters. Consequently, the rest of the voters lost the possibility to take part in the elections. Wrong use of "Withdrawn" stamp inballot papers Almost in all constituencies of Zhytomyr oblast there were errors detected in using "Withdrawn" stamp for introduction of changes to the ballot papers. On the part of the constituencies’ polling stations of the oblast at 11:00 a.m. changes were not still introduced to the ballot papers for voting in the nationwide electoral district by putting "Withdrawn" stamp in front of the Party "Sobor". In Zhytomyr oblast errors were detected on the exclusion of the Party "Sobor." At some polling stations "Withdrawn" stamp was put opposite the name of another Party - All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" instead of the Party "Sobor". Obstruction of work of offi cial observers and other persons who have the right to be present at the commission meeting without permission or invitation of the commission In Zhytomyr oblast (election district № 65) the PEC of the polling station № 181 322 (Novohrad-Volynsky city) didn’t let the CVU observer to assist at the preparatory meeting of the commission. To justify their decision they explained that NGOs are not allowed to observe the elections. The observer explained the law to the commission and contacted the DEC on this matter. As a result, the observer was allowed to be present at the meeting. In the election district № 62 (polling station № 181 361, Zhytomyr city) international observers were not allowed to assist at the commission meeting. Ensuring voters access to information about the order of voting and information posters of parties and parliamentary candidates In the vast majority of polling stations where observers of the Committee of voters of Ukraine were present, the requirements of the legislation regarding obligatory placement of information posters and explanation of the procedure of voting were implemented properly. In most cases information posters and explanations were placed in a way that voters could read the content before receiving ballot papers and voting. However, on some polling stations information posters were not placed (polling stations №№ 560 725, 560 726, 560 727 of the election district № 153, Rivne oblast), moreover, PEC of polling stations №№ 560 725 and 560 726 did not receive them at all. In some cases (for instance, on the polling station № 140 131 of the election district № 59, Donetsk oblast), absence or removal of posters in PEC premises was explained by the fact that campaigning on election day was prohibited. Therefore, in future election law should include clear provisions explaining that parties and candidates' information posters in single-mandate precincts should not be regarded as campaigning materials. Emergency events In Donetsk oblast in the PEC of the polling station № 141 626 in Budionivs’kyi district of Donetsk (building of the school № 142, 17, Blahoustriina st.) an emergency took place – some ballot papers were burnt. At the preparatory meeting of the commission before the beginning of the vote somebody stole the keys to the safe from the purse belonging to
the head of the DEC Natalia Kofanova. Ballot papers for voting on the polling station were kept in there. The Head of the commission stated that after it happened somebody tried to open the safe with the help of a saw. As a result, 302 ballot papers caught fire and were burnt. Violationof the terms of the beginning of the vote Although, according to the Law "On Election of People’s Deputies of Ukraine" the vote must start at 8 a.m., in Zhytomyr oblast (election district № 65) on the polling station № 1810 082 (Chervonoarmiis’ky district, village Kurine) the vote did not start even at 10 a.m. This was due to the fact that on 27th October an unknown person, who introduced himself as a member of DEC called to the PEC and announced about cancellation of the registration of parliamentary candidates in nationwide electoral district from AllUkrainian Union "Svoboda", consequently "Withdrawn" stamp should have been put against the name of the list of "Svoboda". The members of the PEC put the stamp on a number of received ballot papers, which is why additional ballot papers needed to be supplied to the polling station. Terms of the beginning of the vote were violated also at a number of polling stations of the election district № 121 (Drohobych city, Lviv oblast). Those delays took place as the preparatory meeting of PEC started late, procedures of this meeting lasted too long and also because before the opening of polling stations priests carried rituals of blessing of polling stations for a good start of their work. At the polling station № 051 507 (Vinnytsya oblast, election district № 11) the vote started only at 8.30 a.m. for the reason of an internal conflict in the PEC, which happened due to the fact that during the last 4 days before the election day the head of the PEC had been changed 4 times. Drawbacks inthe implementationof video surveillance of the vote At polling stations where observers of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine were present, video surveillance generally was carried out in accordance with the Law "On Specifics of openness, transparency and democracy of elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine on the 28th of October 2012" and Procedure of carrying out of video surveillance at polling stations with the use of means of video surveillance, access and control over the functioning of video surveillance system during the elections of people's deputies of Ukraine on the 28th of October 2012, approved by the CEC resolution № 892 of 13th September 2012 (the exception to this rule, however, was Vinnytsya oblast, where 95% of PECs did not properly implement requirements of the CEC resolution № 892 regarding the definition of operators of software and hardware systems, inspection of their work, etc.). In accordance with the requirements of the CEC resolution № 1850 of October 24, 2012 at the entrance to the premises for voting at polling stations, as well as within corresponding PEC premises sheets of paper containing messages about video surveillance and its absence in voting cabins were placed. However, at some polling stations such sheets were still missing. In particular, the polling stations №№ 711 075 and 711 079 (Cherkasy oblast, Cherkasy city). At some polling stations cameras were placed in a way that surveillance of the places where ballot papers were handed over and the places where ballot boxes were installed was carried out at the wrong angle, which did not allow to those who were interested to properly observe the process of voting. In particular, at the station № 711 076 (Cherkasy oblast, Cherkasy city) the camera was aimed at a cabin for secret voting, while ballot boxes were out of reach for video surveillance. In Dnipropetrovsk oblast (election district № 27) at polling stations № 169, 112, 113, 184, 180 cameras for surveillance only partially showed places for handover of ballot papers and ballot boxes. A similar situation occurred at the polling station № 347 of the same district. At polling stations №
198 and № 199 of the election district № 27 cameras for video surveillance were switched on only at 10 a.m. on election day, while at polling station № 167 of the same election district cameras were installed in a way that with the help of video fixation the will of voters could be defined. Violationof the order of ballot papers handover to voters Although the Law "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine" prohibits handover of ballot papers to voters at general and special polling stations on the basis of foreign passports, PEC members of the polling station № 560 918 (Rivne city, Rivne oblast) registered two cases of handover of ballot papers on the basis of presentation of foreign passports. Rare cases of voting without presenting passports of a citizen of Ukraine observers registered in Vinnytsya oblast. In Odessa oblast (election district № 133) at the polling station № 511 081 a ballot paper was given to a voter on the basis of presenting his pension certificate. At the same polling station a voter was given a ballot paper on the basis of her marriage certificate: in the voters list the voter’s maiden name was indicated, the latter together with the passport to the new name presented the marriage certificate and received ballot papers. Inaccuracies invoters lists and other abuses related to voters registration On the hotline of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine 300 messages about inaccuracies in the voters lists were received - the presence in the lists of persons who are not entitled to vote, the absence in the lists of persons who had reached the age of 18, indication of the wrong data in the voters lists. This situation is of particular concern due to the fact that the representatives of the CEC repeatedly stressed the high level of reliability, accuracy and completeness of the State Voter Register database. In Vinnytsya oblast the number of inaccuracies in the corrected voters lists reached approximately 5% of the total number of persons included in these lists. In Kyiv oblast (election district № 95) it was found that the number of voters in the dormitory of the National University of the State Tax Service, which is chaired by the Rector and parliamentary candidate in the election district № 95 P.Melnyk, did not correspond to the number of places in the dormitory. In Khmelnytsky oblast (election district № 193), many young voters aged 18-19 years could not find themselves in the voters lists at polling stations №№ 333 and 342. In Ivano-Frankivsk oblast (election district № 84) a voter who came to one of the polling stations of Burshtyn, noticed the signature of an unidentified person in the voters list against his name. At one of the polling stations of Mykolaiv oblast (polling station № 480 766 of single-mandate election district № 127) a woman who died in 2005 was included to the corrected voters list. In the Autonomous Republic of Crimea on PECs №№ 010 849 and 010 861 pencil marks were found in the voters lists. When observers paid attention to it, a member of the commission immediately began to erase the inscriptions. According to observers, there were such pencil inscription as "abroad", "Quit", "absent", which may indicate the conditions necessary for voting in place of absent voters. Excessive number of voters for voting at the place of residence and violations related to voting atthe place of stay In Vinnytsya oblast (election district № 12) at three polling stations the number of voters included in the extract from the list of voters to vote at their place of stay, was about 10% of the total number of voters in the lists, while at the rest of the polling stations of the election district it did not exceed 2%. In Chernihiv oblast on the territory of the election district № 206 an average number of voters who expressed the will to vote at their place of stay, was only 4%. However, at some polling stations of the election
district the number of such voters exceeded 20% of the total number of voters in the voters list. This concerns in particular the polling station № 740 691 (village Smahivka) 25% and № 740 671 (village Malynivka) — 23%. In Poltava oblast (election district № 144) at the polling station № 531 200 an extract from the voters list had been stolen, that actually led to the loss for the voters who were included in it of the opportunity to participate in the vote. In Zaporizhzhya oblast (election district № 82) PEC members of the polling station № 444 came to a retired woman in order to ensure her voting at the place of stay. While the woman was looking for her passport, the members of the commission left depriving thereby the voter a possibility to vote. In Cherkassy oblast at the polling station № 710 930 (Smila city) more than a half of voters included in the extract of the voters list for voting at their place of stay did not give to the PEC medical certificates that would confirm their inability to move independently. In addition, applications for having a possibility to vote at the place of stay were written with the same handwriting. Campaigning onelectionday In Dnipropetrovsk oblast (election district № 24) in front of the polling stations № № 444, 248, 249, 268, 267, 266, 237, 241 trading tents were installed. There food products were sold on behalf of a parliamentary candidate in the election district № 24 Ya. Bezbah. In Donetsk oblast (election district № 51, Horlivka city) near the polling station № 141 533 CVU observers registered another case of illegal campaigning campaigning materials of parliamentary candidate Petro Antyp were placed on a building near the polling station. Observers informed the head of PEC about that fact, but he did not react to the message. As a result, CVU and candidates’ official observers drew up a report on detection of violations of the Law "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine". In Sumy oblast on election day SMS messages were sent out asking people to support the Party of Regions, as well as parliamentary candidates Iepifanova and Kostenko. Representatives of the Party of Regions and the candidates called sending of such messages a provocation. Later it was found that messages were sent out from a mobile phone belonging to an employee of Sumy oblast state administration Artem Sokolov. In Mykolaiv oblast on election day campaigning was carried out by the Communist Party of Ukraine, under its flags an anniversary of Ukraine's liberation from Nazi occupation was celebrated. In addition, on the polling station № 480 750 the head of the Precinct electoral commission gave an advise to a voter to vote for the candidate Zadyrka. In Ternopil oblast on the first floor of the building where was located the DEC of the election district № 164, campaigning leaflets of the parliamentary candidate of the Party of Regions O.Mutsa were laid out on the tables. Photographing ballot papers, attempts to take ballot papers outside the premises for voting and other actions thatmay indicate votebuying At the polling station № 560 918 (Rivne city, Rivne oblast) official observers of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine registered several cases when they heard sounds peculiar to photographing ballot papers in voting cabins, which might indicate the possibility of vote buying. In Dnipropetrovsk oblast at the polling station № 234 of the election district № 24 a voter tried to take a ballot paper outside the voting room, but was detained, and after that he ripped the ballot paper to shreds. As a result of these actions observers drew up a report on violations of the Law "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine". In Vinnytsya oblast (election district № 15) the headmaster of a local school makes teachers vote at the polling station № 051 378 for the Party of Regions and take pictures of filled ballot papers on their mobile phones. Facts of
photographing ballots papers observers registered also in Chernihiv oblast (election district № 206, polling station № 771 095). However, in some oblasts CVU observers registered even more obvious facts of vote buying. Thus, in Kherson oblast (election district № 184) at the polling station № 296 the head of Dubivs’ke village council with village budget money paid the cost of the bus (state number AA1176P), which carried out the transportation of people to the polling station. In the bus campaigning for the Party of Regions was carried and money was distributed to people (150 UAH to each person). In Chernihiv oblast (election district № 208) in the village Noselivtsi of Borznyanskyi district the head of the village council together with his assistants at the entrance to the polling station offered voters at choice a bottle of vodka or 20 UAH, while calling upon to vote for a parliamentary candidate M. Golytsia. In Donetsk oblast (election district № 44, Pokrovsky and Kirovsky districts of Donetsk) at the polling stations № 141 815 (I. Franko Culture center) the so-called "Carrousel" was "launched" - in front of the polling station a voter received a ballot paper, put it down to the ballot box, then took a blank ballot paper out of the polling station and handed it to the organizer of illegal actions, receiving money or other material rewards for that, while blank ballot paper was filled and given to another voter. "Carrousels" were also seen in the election district № 53 (Yenakieve city) - black jeep SsangYong and white Chevrolet Lacetti drove to the polling stations № № 140 841, 140 855 and 140 871, 5 people went out and voted on each of these stations. CVU informed the spokesman of the Donetsk oblast prosecutor about this fact. Another oblast where the technology of "Carrousel" was applied was Vinnytsya oblast - participants of the criminal scheme were brought to the polling stations in the buses with state registered numbers №№ АВ 8229 ВК, АВ 4585 ВІ, АВ 5754 АВ, АВ 7700 АС, АВ 97522 ВИ, АВ 1856 ВН, although later the wheels of those buses were damaged. In this same area near the polling station law enforcement bodies detained persons who had lists of voters and ballot papers with them. At the polling station № 051 535 falsified voters lists were detected. Those who had the lists could not give a clear answer which party or candidate they represented. Some of them also had fake certificates of nonexistent newspapers which were confiscated from them. (Video by the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sefaGcEPRD8&feature=youtu.be). In Yampil city of Vinnytsya oblast for voting for one of the parties, voters were offered 500 UAH. They had to take a digital camera with them in order to take a picture of a “correctly” filled ballot paper in the voting cabin and then to receive a cash reward. In the election district № 15 (polling station № 051 107, village Hnatkiv, Tomashpils’ky district) a fact of vote buying was registered by representatives of the parliamentary candidate in majoritarian election district V. Vovk. At 3 p.m. during the vote representatives of Vasyl Vovk drove voters to the polling station and gave money for the votes in his favor. Voters were taken to the polling station with the car VAZ 2106, the number plate KE58838. After having voted a voter came back home in the same car, where, according to most voters, they received 50 hryvnas for their votes. In Lugansk oblast (electoral district #108) a fact of food distribution amon voters was registered on the territory of polling station № 146 (village Maloivanovka of Perevalsky rayon). The food was distributed from a car which belongs to candidate in people's deputy Valeriy Moshynskiy. In Moshynskiy’s headquarters his representatives explained that the products were brought solely for the members of the PEC. However the observers of candidate Oleksandr Rzhavskiy saw that the packages were distributed among village residents. In Kyiv city (election district #217) on Pivnichna street unknown persons offered voters 400 hryvnas for each vote in favor of candidate V. Stolar. Handover of money for «correct» voting was also detected in electoral district #160 (Sumy oblast). For instance money were distributed in Konotop near the house of common services (Lenina street)
in favour of the candidate V.Molotok. In Lugansk oblast DEC of election district #106 (Severodonetsk) received statements about violation of Law “About the elections of parliamentary members in Ukraine”, namely the voters were bribed to vote in favor of candidate Yu.Furman. Facts of bribery towards voters were also detected in Zakarpattya oblast (election district#70). At the polling station #210443 (Svalyava), that is situated in the region were representatives of Roma nationality live, they were arriving in groups of ten and went to vote with the supervisor. After the voting Romas received money just 40-50 meters away from the polling station. Also at this polling station was conducted an attempt to carry out the ballots. In Odessa oblast (election district #137) voters reported that in Balta and Balta rayon they were offered from 200 to 500 UAH to vote in favor of the Party of Regions and its candidates. Voters were offered a list of numbers which included numbers of party and of candidates that had to be supported in the election lists. Violations of the secrecy of voting In Zakarpattya oblast (election district #70) on polling station #210259 (village Verhniy Studeniy, Mizhgirya rayon) official observers detected that director of the local school Rosada made teachers demonstrate him filled out voting ballots. Numerous cases of violation of secrecy of voting were also detected by the CVU observers at polling stations ##11, 12, 14, 16, 17 and 18 (Vinnytsya oblast). In Cherkassy oblast on the number of polling stations collective” voting was observed (PEC# 170084 of election district № 198, PEC №711005 of election district № 194) and voting outside the cabin for secret voting (PEC #560962 of single mandate majority election district #152 and PEC #560350 election district #154). However such cases are more an exception from the general rule than a common practice. On the other hand during the election on the territory of election district #214 (Kyiv city) cases of voting outside the voting cabins were rather numerous. Falsiﬁcation of the results of voting Fact of massive throw-in of ballots to ballot boxes was detected in Donetsk oblast (election district #52, PEC #140704). According to the information of the official observer two unknown persons dropped to the ballot box pack of ballots printed by office printer. When observers noticed the violations infringers left the PEC. PEC representatives called the police and consulted with the DEC. As the results of the consultation it was decided that to go on with the voting process using this ballot box, because the false ballots were easily distinguishable among the real ballots and could be easily removed during the counting. In Vinnytsya oblast (election district #11) in PEC of polling station #051524 the attempt to throw in ballots in favor of Natalya Dobrynska was blocked, as a result five ballots were discharged. In Odessa oblast in one of the districts the pens with vanishing ink were used for filling in the ballots. Altogether such pens were detected at 29 polling stations of the district (## 511090, 511123, 511119, 511104, 511095, 511157, 511135, 511138, 511111, 511112, 511126, 511074, 511075, 511073, 511093, 511087, 511148, 511114, 511158, 511085, 511092, 511094, 511096, 511097, 511103). Head of the DEC issued corresponding statement to the prosecutor’s office. Obstacles to activities of ofﬁcial observers and other individuals who have right to be present at sessions or on the voting premises without permission or invitation from the committee. In Zakarpattya oblast (election district #68) head of PEC of polling station #210730 right after the beginning of counting started to threaten the official observers. His behavior he explained by the fact that observers “interfered” with the counting process, but he couldn’t clarify how exactly they did it. He also didn’t give them a chance to inspect the
ballot boxes when the observers saw that they were not sealed properly. In election district #71 (Zakarpattya oblast) official observer of the CVU was not admitted to the DEC session. Secretary of the committee explained such decision by saying that according to the badge observer can be present only at the polling stations. In Rivne oblast on several polling stations (##560789 (election district #156), ##560945, 560974, 560915 (election district #152) official observers were not admitted to the voting premises. At the same oblast (election district #156, Sarny) members of the DEC closed themselves in the cabinet and were not allowing anyone to enter, explaining that it’s not DEC sessions, so the observers do not have to be present. Observers called the police. After that the head of DEC of election district #156 Sergiy Loskutov informed present that police still did not allow representatives of four media editions to be present in the room where DEC worked basing on the text of Law “About the elections of parliamentary members in Ukraine”. Police claimed that the DEC was not conducting sessions, so observers had no right to be present and were interfering with the work of DEC. In Donetsk oblast official observer of the CVU, who conducted the observation at polling station #140704 in Dzerzhynsk, was threaten by unknown persons. As a result he had to leave the polling station. In the same city correspondent of local newspaper “Chystaya Pravda” was approached by unknown persons who asked her to show her credentials and tore them apart. Journalist had to leave the polling station as well. Threatening to observers was also detected at polling station ##141812 and 141771 of election district #44 (Donesk). In Mykolaiv oblast official observer from candidate O.Mudrak, I. Nedopusk was not admitted to the premises polling station #480781. The PEC representatives explained this decision saying that another observer from this candidate is already present in polling station, but in fact he already left. In Autonomous Republic of Crimea DEC of election district #10 made a decision to refuse representative of media the right to be present during the session, because he had arrived (9:15 PM) late and could not registered in time. Most of the members of the DEC voted in favor of this decision. The same DEC also refused journalists of “Noviy kanal” to be present at the DEC session. Presence during voting process of persons who do not have the rightto be present According to the Law “About the elections of parliamentary members of Ukraine” the only people who have right to be present during the voting process are voters, who had not yet casted their vote, members of election committee and also individuals who have right to be present at sessions or on the voting premises without permission or invitation from the committee. However in Rivne oblast at the number of polling stations unknown persons were present in the voting premises. For example they were seen at polling stations ## 560247, 560347, 560872, 560610 (election district # 154), ## 560926, 560948, 560915 (election district #152), # 560983 (election district # 153). In Mykolaiv oblast (election district #132) on the polling station of village Kamyaniy Mist head of the local council was present. He left the PEC only after request from the official observer. Difference between offi cial data on voter turnout and data on turnout based on observationof parallel votetabulation Observers of the Committee of voters of Ukraine Donetsk oblast organisation conducted parallel tabulation of voter turnout in the framework of all-Ukrainian election observation campaign on the E-Day. With a help of special mechanical device two observers during the day registered every voter who put ballot papers in the box. On polling station №141601 of single-mandate election district №41 (Donetsk oblast) number of voters who put ballot papers into the ballot boxes (according to parralel vote tabulation
condcted by CVU and OPORA observers) was 998 persons, or 47,9% of total number of voters in the list. However, according to data of vote tabulation protocol there were 1543 voters or 74% of total number of voters in the list. Similar difference was recorded on other polling stations of Donetsk oblast. In particular, on polling station №141732 of single-mandate election district №45 according to parralel vote tabulation there were 1351 voters who participated in elections or 64,2%, while according to the protocol there were 1509 voters or 71,7% of total number of voters in the list. On polling station №140577 of the same election district 890 voters put their ballot papers in the boxes (47,6% of total number of voters), while official turnout on this polling station was 1020 voters or 53,6% of total number of voters. On polling station №141808 of singlemandate election district № 43 of Donetsk oblast 1243 voters put their ballot papers to stationary ballot boxes (50,5% of total number of voters), but according to official data there were 1371 voters who participated in elections (55,8% of total number of voters). 9. VOTE COUNTING, TABULATION OF THE RESULTS OF THE VOTING AND ESTABLISHMENT OF ELECTION RESULTS In contrast to voting, tote counting and establishment of results in some regions was accompanied by numerous violations and other problems, which caused a necessity in repeat elections in 5 single-mandate election districts and put in question legitimacy of elections in some other districts (in particular, in election districts №№ 11 and 14 of Vinnitsya oblast, though results of elections in these districts were confirmed by court decisions). Among problematic aspects of this stage of elections the following shoud be noted: Violation of voting counting procedured at polling stations, incorrect pacjking of electiondocumentationand incorrect filling of protocols Analysis of information provided by CVU regional offices gives grounds to a statement that procedure of vote counting and filling in protocols on vote counting was not always followed. Among the main violations the following should be noted:
division of PEC into groups for ballot papers counting. Ballot papers counting by several PEC members in the same time was registered on election stations № № 480703 (election district № 132, Mykolaiv oblast), 511215 (election district №1 34, Odessa oblast), 850145 (election district № 225, Sevastopol city) тand some other polling stations; limit of observers' opportunities to control over vote counting, prevention of ofﬁcial observers from work. On polling station № 82 of single-mandate election district № 90 (Kyiv oblast) PEC head pushed observers and did not let them observe on vote counting process from close distance. In single-mandate election district № 154 (Rivne oblast) about 10 cases were registered when observers were not let inside polling stations, one of suc cases was confirmed by court decision and the others confirmed by acts of election legislation violation. In Chernihiv oblast (single-mandate election district № 207) numerouses cases when party newspaper of “Batkivschyna” journalists were refused from observing at polling stations. Official reason was presence of party stamp and not newspaper stamp on the observers' certificates; break of PEC continuous meeting. On polling station № 560934 of singlemandate election district № 152 (Rivne oblast) PEC after completion of voting announced a break till 21:30 and started vote counting only after the break. incorrect establishment of ballot papers balance, incorrect consideration of certain ballot papers or other election documentation categories which caused necessity to prepare speciﬁed protocols. On polling station №
070212 of election district № 23 (Volyn oblast) members of PEC could not distinguish between invalid ballot paper and ballot paper which is not subject to consideration. Similar situation occured in a number of polling stations in Odessa oblast (polling stations №№ 511194, 511224, 511225, 511167, 511174, 511176 of election district № 134). On polling station № 070073 (election district № 20, Volyn oblast) control sheets separated from ballot papers spoilt by voters were counted together with control sheets of ballot papers which were subject to counting, wich caused incomliance of control sheets number with the number of voters who took part in the voting. Members of PEC № 070347 (election district № 21, Volyn oblast) established number of voters who took part in the voting without consideration of number of voters in excerpt from voter list. Moving ballot boxes out of premises for voting. In Mykolaiv oblast on polling station 134 of election district № 132 head of PEC after end of voting ordered to leave only one ballot box in the premises for voting, and to take the other boxes to the other room, where they stayed for an hour. Violation of the law was stopped only after PEC received a call from CEC. Not sealing packages with protocols or packages with other election documentation. Cases with unsealed packages with election documentation and protocols were rather common and were registered in a number of districts. In particular, packages with protocols were not sealed by PEC ДВК № 511114, 511100 of election district № 133 (Odessa oblast). PEC № 462062 of election district № 117 (Lviv oblast) just put election documentation into safe-box without sealing, causing repeated counting for this polling station. PEC of polling station №681252 (Khmelnytsky oblast, election district 190) delivered a package with ballot papers in favour of candidate in deputy Buryak without sealing and stamping it. Sealing protocols together with other election documents, sealing several types of election documents in one package, sealing ballot papers in plastic bags by duck tape or sealing election documents without putting a stamp on a package. PEC № 511103 of election district № 133 (Odessa oblast) sealed protocols together with other election documents. Numerous cases of similar violations were registered in election districts № 141 (Odessa oblast), № 81 (Zaporizhzhya oblast). In particular, members of PEC № 510171 delivered protocols on vote tabulation to DEC in plastic bags and DEC decided to accept documents from PEC. On polling station № 299 of election district № 80 (Zaporizhzhya oblast) acts on spoilt ballot papers were sealed together with ballot papers. Signing protocols on vote tabulation before ﬁlling them in. This type of violation was registered on polling stations №№ 510056, 510055, 510800, 510801, 510782 of election district № 142, on polling station № 181488 of election district № 62 (Zhytomyr oblast), on polling station № 530037 (election district № 151, Poltava oblast). On polling station №282 (election district № 58, Donetsk oblast) authorised representative of “Batkivschyna” registered fact of signing protocol of vote tabulation at 17:30, even before the end of voting. Cases of signing unfilled protocols on vote tabulation were also registered in Mykolaiv oblast. In particular, head of PEC № 480271 (Anetivka village of Domaniv rayon) rewrote the protocol directly on a meeting of election district № 131 DEC, when protocols were accepted from PECs. Incorrect ﬁlling of protocols on vote tabulation. Incorrect filling of protocols on vote tabulation was common in many single-mandate election districts. Among the most typical mistakes there were: putting dashes instead of zeroes, incorrect introduction of candidates' surnames or party names, putting different data in
different copies of the same protocol, violation of order for protocols filling caused by cancellation of “Sobor” candidates' registration by CEC. Copies of protocols not provided to persons who have rightto receive them CVU official observers registered a number of cases when copies of protocols were not provided to persons who have right to receive them. In particular, PEC of polling station № 141601 of election district № 41 (Donetsk oblast) refused to give copies of vote tabulation protocols to observers at the polling station, stating that observers will get copies only after PEC members will return from DEC. Similar cases were registered on polling station № 141653 of election district № 42 of Donetsk oblast, on polling station № 511081 of election district № 133 (Odessa oblast), on polling station № 440328 одномандатного election district № 108 (Luhansk oblast), on polling station № 681491, Khmelnytsky oblast. Violations during the transportationof electiondocuments Among the most common violations during the transportation of election documents from the PECs to DECs were transporting by less number of persons then required by the Law, damaging of the package of documents, transporting to local authorities institutions instead of DEC. In particular, in single-mandate election district № 28 members of PEC № 377 sealed election documentation in front of DEC with a help of DEC member. Besides, after revealing this fact DEC refused to repeat vote tabulation for this PEC. In Mykolaiv oblast head of PEC № 480005 (election district № 132) took with him only members of Party of Regions for transporting protocol on vote tabulation, and he had with him unfilled protocols signed by all PEC members. In Odessa oblast election documentation for precinct №511213 was taken to DEC by only two PEC members. At one of PECs in Tarascha city (election district №91, Kyiv oblast) a policeman tried to get into the car with ballot papers instead of commission member (one policeman was already in the car). As a result the car was blocked by opposition representatives with other cars. They make PEC provide transporting election documentation in accordance with the law requirements. In election district №94 (Kyiv oblast) protocols from all precincts were first transported to city executive commitee by the order of tetiana Zasukha, and then to DEC. In Rivne oblast representatives of some PEC brought to DEC ballot papers and protocols not properly sealed. After correcting mistakes, members of PECs sealed ballot boxes in DEC, sealed protcols in envelopes and brought them to DEC members who accepted the documentation. Пtransporting of election documentation was accompanied by numerous violations in a number of Lviv oblast election districts. Among the most typical violations — unseled election documentation (PEC № 462034 of election district № 115), transportation of specified protocols by PEC head by himself (PEC №461996 of election district № 115), transporting of election documentation with secretary of PEC (PEC № 462126 of election district№ 116). In one of Zhytomy oblast districts head of PEC №181384 (of Party of Regions) refused to sign the protocol, took away the stamp and ballot papers and went from the polling station with policemen, leaving no copy of the protocol to observers and commission members. Observers from the united opposition found out that PEC head went to party of regions office, stayed there for 10 minutes and then went to DEC. Insufficiencient organisationof electiondocument acceptance by DECs
In majority of election districts where Committee of voters of Ukraine observers monitored voting and vote tabulation, there was no efficient accaptance of election documentation at DEC. On October 28-29 there were long lines of PEC members in front of DECs, while by morning many DECs have processed less then 50% of vote tabulation protocols (districts ## 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 74, 75, 92, 94, 95, 96, 98 (all districts of Lviv and Kherson oblasts). Drawbacks in organisation of election documentation provoked situation when commission members left this documentation unsupervised. In particular, in Kiev oblast (election district #95) staff of PECs in Vyshneve and Boyarka by the direction of DEC left the election documentation at the premises of PEC and until 3PM left to their homes. In the same district head and deputy head of the DEC were missing from 2 to 4 AM on October 29th. Due to this fact the DEC was not able to accept protocols during that period of time. Election documents were also left in the PEC (election district #98, Boryspil) until 10AM of October 29th. In election district № 107 (Lugansk oblast) after some waiting representatives of 10 PEC of Stakhanov city left DEC premises together with protocols which they did not hand over. These cars were stopped by DAI on city exit and returned back to DEC-107 accompanied by Lusichansk policemen. Violationof the electionresults establishment procedure inthe districts In a number of districts there were serious violations in the process of election results establishment, that might have influenced or influenced on the final election results: unsealing and damage of boxes with election documentation (election districts №№ 11, 14, Vinnitsya oblast), withdrawal of election documentation by internal affairs institutions officials (election district № 132, Mykolaiv oblast), on-purpose damage of ballot papers in support of certain candidate who had a little more votes in his support compared with the other candidate, prevention from observation on establishment of election results by “sportive apperance” persons with journalist certificates, cases of violence and holligan actions, introduction of unreliable data into “Elections” system (election district № 121, Lviv oblast; election district № 132, Mykolaiv oblast; election district № 159, Khmelnytsky district) etc. Among the most problematic districts are №№ 11, 14, 20, 90, 94, 132, 194, 197, 223. On five of them violations were so severe that CEC refused to establish voting results and turned to parliament with an appeal for repeaded voting in these districts (see below). Among less serious violations of the process of election results establishment the following should be noted:
division of DEC members into groups for acceptance of election documentation or for reading of protocols of vote tabulation. In election district № 20 (Volyn oblast) election documentation was for some time accepted not by the head but by the secretary of DEC without reading in loud content of the vote tabulation protocols. In election district №7 (Yalta city, Autonomous republic of Crimea) DEC decided to accept documentation in several lines by small groups of DEC members; conduction of secret voting on some issues in the competence of DEC. DEC of district № 71 (Zakarpattya oblast) held secret voting on the possibility to declare results of voting on one of election stations invalid (by putting “ballot papers” into the box); DEC refusal from repeated vote tabulation in case of reasons for such tabulation. In particular, in Donetsk oblast DEC of election district № 43 during acceptance of protocols from PEC refused to decide on repeated tabulation even
in cases when there were enough grounds revealed for necessary repeated counting; compilation of speciﬁed protocols in DEC. In Odessa oblast members of PEC № 511087 (election district № 133) compiled specified protocol directly in DEC.
CEC refusal to establish electionresults for five single-mandate electiondistricts On November 5, 2012 CEC passed a Resolution on unability to establish verifiable voting results and results of 28 October 2012 elections of people's deputies of Ukraine in single-mandate election districts № 94, 132, 194, 197 and 223 and appealed to parliament on possibility to conduct repeated elections in these districts. The parliament, in its turn, assigned CEC to assign the repeated elections in the 5 districts and define the scope of financing. In this regard it should be noted that the Law On Elections of the People's Deputies of Ukraine foresees possibility of repeated elections only in cases when there were no candidates registered in an election district or when only one candidate took part in the elections and was supported by less then a half of voters who participated in the elections, or when the elected candidate did not receive the mandate. The Law On Elections of the People's Deputies of Ukraine aslo forbids to cancell election results in single-mandate election district. So the quaestion if the CEC has right not to esablish election results in single-mandate election districts remains rather disputable, though courts actually supported CEC decision on unability to establish election results in these districts.
FINAL MONITORING REPORT ON RESULTS OF 2012 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS