The by-election of MP of Ukraine in single-mandate district #179 (Kharkiv oblast) is scheduled for 15 March 2020, since the current Head of Kharkiv Oblast State Administration Oleksii Kucherhas has resigned. The election process has officially begun on January 16, and its results should be determined not later than the fifteenth day after the voting day. This election will be held under the Law of Ukraine on the Election of People's Deputies of Ukraine, according to transitional provisions of the Election Code. As the Election Code introduces an open-list proportional election system, this by-election in district #179 may be the last one held under the relative majority electoral system. This election being held under the old legislation, requires the CEC to clarify insufficiently defined procedures or legislative gaps.
The Central Election Commission is the key subject of election administration in this by-election, which registers candidates, creates DECs and determines election results. Political parties have failed to nominate members to DECs. Thus, Head of the CEC had to nominate members to form a minimum membership. Thus, 4 of the 12 DEC members were nominated by Head of the CEC to meet minimum membership requirements. Passiveness of parties in formation of DECs not only creates extra job for the CEC forced to find lower-level commission members, but also puts the highest election administration body at risk of being accused of political motivation. The CEC provides legal and conflict-free registration of MPs. At the time this report was published, there was only one court appeal against the Commission's decision to register a candidate, which did not lead to the cancellation of his registration. The CEC makes sufficient efforts to interpret election procedures and takes measures to improve the effectiveness of the election process. For example, the CEC took a decision to provide PECs with software tools to verify the completeness and correctness of tabulation protocols at polling stations.
The CEC registered 40 candidates, 28 of whom were nominated by political parties. Only 2 parliamentary parties (Servant of the People and European Solidarity) have formally nominated their candidates for the by-election. The Servant of the People Party decided not to continue fighting for seat in the Parliament and publicly supported the candidate Yulia Svitlychna, who held the office of the Head of Kharkiv Oblast State Administration earlier. This decision was quite resonant in the public. We should also mention in this context that another high-rated party, the Opposition Platform - For Life, also haven't officially nominated a candidate. Its member Oleksandr Didenko had nominated independently, but withdrew his candidacy. At the time this report was published, leading political parties in the country, such as Servant of the People, Opposition Platform - For Life, Batkivshchyna, and Holos, are not competing with each other for a deputy mandate in the district, what narrows the choice. After the deadline for withdrawal from the election, 37 candidates have left, who will be included in the ballot.
The low interest of parliamentary and other high-rated parties in the by-election had negatively impacted the formation and completeness of PECs. Only the parties Servant of the People, Opposition Platform - For Life, and European Solidarity, which have factions in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, used the right to nominate members of these commissions. At the same time, only 5 MP candidates submitted their nominees for PEC members. Such passiveness of parties and candidates forced the DEC to form all PECs of the district in minimum composition. Moreover, the DEC had to engage citizens independently. Not all parliamentary parties also took an opportunity to submit candidates to the commission controlling the production of ballots. As we can see, the stability of election process depends on the willingness or ability of political parties and candidates to exercise their legal rights. Thus, it would be reasonable to discuss the need of making election commissions professional. The functionality of election commissions is also in question, while they are formed and staffed solely on the basis of political criteria. OPORA believes that discussions of this matter is extremely important. Still, candidates and parties should have an opportunity to control election management. In particular, it is important to ensure the transition to mandatory certification of election commission members during an inter-election period.
According to OPORA's observers, the DEC demonstrates high competence despite many rotations. Despite all PECs in the district were formed with minimal composition, their members have managed to stabilize their work and start preparations to the vote.
Although OPORA has detected a number of electoral law violations, the election campaign meets basic standards of democratic elections at the moment. There are no confirmed facts of voter bribery or other forms of offering monetary incentive to citizens. OPORA's observers made remarks concerning public interaction between Head of Kharkiv Oblast State Administration Oleksii Kucher and the ruling party candidate, Viktoriia Alieksieichuk, in the election process. However, once the candidate refused to participate in the campaign, these risks have lost their relevance. As long as competitiveness of the election has suffered after withdrawal of a number of candidates, it is important to prevent any misuse of administrative resources or other illegal influence on voters.
The by-election of MP of Ukraine in single-mandate district #179 has again confirmed the need to strengthen mechanisms ensuring the transparency and accountability of electoral finances. According to the latest information form OPORA, 26 candidates opened election fund accounts. According to the law, no campaign expenses can be made outside the election funds.
Activities of the CEC
The CEC is the key body authorized to organize and hold by-election of MP in district #179. The commission registers and cancels registration of MP candidates and their proxies, forms a district election commission, gives NGOs a permission to have official observers, registers observers from foreign states and international organizations, approves a form and text of ballot paper.
The Central Election Commission is authorized to determine the by-election results, as well as to prepare and publish the analysis of financial reports from election fund administrators.
The CEC also took additional decisions on proper organization and holding of by-election of MP of Ukraine, some of which were related to the gaps in electoral legislation. In particular, these decisions include:
- explanation of some peculiarities of declaring assets, income and expenses of candidates;
- decision on the organizational and financial support of campaigning at the expense of the State Budget of Ukraine regarding the possibility of placing campaigning materials in printed media of ownership;
- interpretation of candidate registration procedures and consideration of requests for amendment of CEC regulations on candidate registration;
- obligation of the DEC to form a working group on ensuring the security and functioning of the Information and Analytical System “Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine”. The working group comprises of representatives of the State Service for Special Communications and Information Protection of Ukraine, the Security Service of Ukraine, and the Cyber Police Department of the National Police of Ukraine;
- providing PECs with software tools to verify the correctness and completeness of tabulation protocols and the obligation of local authorities to provide election commissions with computers to use this software.
The Central Election Commission has created a commission controlling the production of ballots, which could include representatives of parties that have parliamentary factions in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine of the current convocation. However, Batkivshchyna and Opposition Platform-For Life parties did not exercise their right to nominee members to this commission.
Registration of MP candidates
Registration of candidates is a key obligation of the CEC, which usually accompanied by politically conflicts in Ukrainian elections. The by-election of MP of Ukraine in single-mandate district #179 may be the last campaign to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, which is held under the relative majority electoral system in a single-member constituency. The reason is, Ukrainian Parliament has adopted the Electoral Code, which establishes an open-list proportional electoral system in multi-member constituencies. Registration of candidates by the CEC was free from conflicts and resonant electoral disputes.
Thus, the CEC registered 40 MP candidates in by-election in district #179, 28 of whom were nominated by political parties, and 12 independently. The commission refused to register MP candidates from three political parties (the Self-governing Ukrainian State, the All-Ukrainian Political Party - Ecology and Social Protection, the Human Rights Party), which did not submit the election deposit. Accordint to the Law on Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine, both candidates nominated by parties and independent ones must pay a deposit to register. This election require 47 thousand 230 hryvnias deposit (ten minimum wages). It is usual for Ukrainian elections that candidates either do not submit to the CEC a document proving they have deposited money or deposit an insufficient amount.
CEC's decisions on registration of candidates by the CEC were legal and free from conflicts. At the time of the report was released, OPORA's observers had information about only one trial related to the candidate registration process. The Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal considered a challenge against registration of independent candidate Mykhailo Sokolov on the basis of information placed online affirming he has the Russian Federation citizenship. The court found no legal grounds to cancel the registration, since citizenship of other countries is not among registration restrictions. In addition, the court did not receive evidence of such candidate's citizenship. This lawsuit was not widely covered by the media and was not accompanied by conflicts.
Candidates or political parties which nominated them could apply to the CEC to withdraw from ballot before 2 march 2020. Thus, the CEC received 3 relevant applications: from two independent candidates and from a candidate of the Servant of the People parliamentary political party. Withdrawals from ballot in this district were specific because members of influential political parties refused to participate in the election. Thus, Victoriia Aleksiichuk, who was nominated by the Servant of the People party, has withdrawn in favor of another candidate, Yuliia Svitlychna. In particular, the Servant of the People party made a formal statement saying that it was important for the party to get into the Parliament "an experienced politician with well-deserved support from society". The CEC also canceled the registration of independent candidate affiliated in the Opposition Platform - For Life party Oleksandr Didenko, who filed an application himself. It is an absolute right of a nominees or members of high-rating parties to withdraw from ballot. However, such decisions have de facto weakened the competition between candidates.
This by-election in district #179 doesn't have a record-breaking number of candidates compared to other by-elections held in 2014-2020. This concerns both the total number of candidates and the number of candidates included in the ballot after the registration of some of them has been canceled.
Thus, the biggest number of candidates was registered at by-election of an MP in district #205 (Chernihiv oblast) in 2015. However, the largest number of candidates included in the ballot was observed in district #114 (Luhansk oblast) in 2016.
Number of candidates in by-election of MPs in 2015, 2016, 2020.
District |
Number of registered candidates |
Number of candidates in the ballot (including withdrawals) |
Year of by-election |
#205 (Chernihiv oblast) |
127 |
91 |
2015 |
#114 (Luhansk obl.) |
108 |
107 |
2016 |
#206 (Chernihiv oblast) |
75 |
74 |
2016 |
#27 (Dnipropetrovsk oblast) |
61 |
59 |
2016 |
#151 (Poltava obl.) |
48 |
47 |
2016 |
#85 (Ivano-Frankivsk obl.) |
37 |
37 |
2016 |
#183 (Kherson obl.) |
30 |
29 |
2016 |
#23 (Volyn obl.) |
19 |
18 |
2016 |
#179 (Kharkiv obl.) |
40 |
37 |
2020 |
Civil Network OPORA has analyzed the qualitative composition of candidates for MP of Ukraine in district #179. Only 2 of 5 parliamentary parties have decided to nominate candidates for by-elections (Servant of the People, European Solidarity). The Batkivshchyna, Opposition Platform - For Life, and Holos party did not exercise the right to nominate candidates. We should mention that independent candidate Oleksandr Didenko is a member of the Opposition Platform - For Life party (has withdrawn from ballot).
Male candidates prevail (23 men, 17 women). The average age of candidates is 42 years. Age group of 25-35 years comprises 10 persons, 35-45 - 15, 45-60 - 15.
While only 23 of 40 candidates are members of political parties, 28 candidates were nominated by parties. 16 candidates are residents of Kharkiv oblast (2 persons live in the district itself), 24 persons are residents of other Ukrainian regions.
14 of 40 candidates were engaged in entrepreneurial activity at the time of their registration, 9 persons were temporarily unemployed, 5 - employed in the field of education and science, 3 - legal services, 2 - retired, 1 - involved in the media, 5 - engaged in other activities.
Candidates with similar or identical personal data
Two female candidates with the same surname take part in the by-election. Yulia Svitlychna is a former Head of Kharkiv Oblast State Administration, while Yana Svitlychna is a private entrepreneur. Following the official registration of these two candidates, some politicians and NGOs affirmed the clone technology was used and accused the CEC of not responding sufficiently to the registration of candidates with the same surname.
However, OPORA states that the CEC had no legal ground not to register two candidates with the same surname and that the Commission took legal decisions. Besides the legal aspect of the issue, it is necessary to notice that there is no information about candidates changing their personal data immediately before the election process begins. The organization believes that the problem of "technical candidates" and technology of "clones" can be solved by imposing criminal responsibility for bribery of a candidate by other participants of political or electoral process. Such liability should arise if there is a proof of receiving or offering an illegal benefit for any actions related to the exercise of passive suffrage. Other mechanisms to counter "technical" candidates and "clones" can lead to an unconstitutional restriction of electoral rights.
Establishing district election commissions
Formation of district election commissions belongs to responsibility of the CEC. There were two subjects authorised to submit their nominees to DEC membership: 1) political parties, which have parliamentary factions in the Verkhovna Rada of current convocation; 2) political parties that registered candidates for MPs in a nationwide election district during the latest parliamentary election. If a party has a faction in parliament and participated in the last parliamentary elections, then it gets one mandatory DEC seat and one more quota by drawing a lot. DECs are shall comprise no less than 12 and no more than 18 members.
Nominees from 5 parliamentary parties are automatically included in the DEC. Instead, nominees from parties that participated in 2019 early elections were subject to a draw of lots in case there were more nominees that seats (maximum 18 persons). If political parties fail to submit a sufficient number of nominees, the CEC shall complete the DEC membership to its minimum composition using submission from Head of the CEC. Thus, 5 parliamentary parties were eligible for the mandatory inclusion of one representative into the DEC, and 22 parties that participated in 2019 early elections could get the representation by drawing lots.
However, political parties did not fully exercise the right to participate in the formation of DECs. Only the Servant of the People, Opposition Platform - For Life and European Solidarity used quotas of a parliamentary party. The Batkivshchyna and Holos, which have parliamentary factions in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, did not submit nominees to the DEC membership.
Only 5 of 22 political parties that nominated candidates in the national district in early parliamentary elections took part in the formation of DECs (Servant of the People, Party of Sharii, Opposition Platform - For Life, Radical Party of Oleh Liashko, and European Solidarity).
Thus, there were 8 candidates for members of DEC #179, and it's not enough to form this commission in the minimum composition. 4 DEC members were nominated by Head of the CEC. These DEC members are not allowed to hold managerial positions.
There were a few substitutions in DPEC membership since its formation:
- On 24 February, 2 DEC members nominated by the Servant of the People party were replaced with 4 members nominated by Head of the CEC;
- On 19 February, a DEC member from the Party of Sharii was substituted;
- On 3 February, 2 members were replaced, who were included on the submission of the CEC chairman.
OPORA's observers inform that DEC members are well prepared despite repeated rotations in its membership. However, a frequent replacement of election commission members, which often occur in Ukrainian elections, is not a good practice in election administration. OPORA welcomes the CEC's commitment to initiate discussions on ways to professionalization of election commission members and calls on the Parliament to form a balanced position on this issue. This approach should ensure the stability of lower-level election commissions, but also preserve the ability of electoral subjects to guarantee a mutual control.
Formation of precinct election commissions
To organise the by-election of MP of Ukraine, the DEC created 189 precinct election commissions (hereinafter - PECs). Both parliamentary parties and MP candidates are authorised to form PECs. Nominees from parties having parliamentary factions in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine are included in PECs automatically. Nominees from MP candidates will be subject to the draw of lots (if necessary). The legislation establishes a minimum and maximum number of PEC members, depending on the size of a polling station.
Parliamentary political parties and MP candidates have not used their full capabilities in the process of PEC formation. Only 3 of 5 parliamentary parties exercised the right to nominate PEC members (Servant of the People, Opposition Platform - For Life, and European Solidarity). 5 of 40 candidates participated in the process of PEC formation (Viktoriia Alieksieichuk, Tetiana Yehorova-Lutsenko, Viktoriia Ptashnyk, Yuliia Svitlychna, Ihor Shvaika). All these political parties and candidates submitted nominees to each PEC (189 individuals from each electoral subject).
Thus, 8 subjects exercised the right to submit candidates for PEC membership, while the minimum PEC membership of a small polling station is 10 persons. As the number of PEC candidates from parties and candidates was insufficient, the DEC decided to form all PECs with minimal membership. Thus, Head of the DEC had to submit lacking members to resolve understaffing.
According to the legislation, each entity nominating PEC members has the right for a proportional share of each category of managerial positions in each small, average, and large precinct election commissions. A PEC member nominated by Head of the CEC may not be appointed to a managerial position in an election commission (except if the number of candidates for these positions from parties and candidates is insufficient). The distribution of managerial positions among entities that nominated PEC members was realised in line with the law. Follow the link for more details about the process of PEC formation: https://bit.ly/2vF2m1a
At the time this report was published, PEC activities were in compliance with legal requirements on organization of the voting process.
Campaigning activeness of candidates
The election process in district #179 has officially began on 16 January 2020, but the active period of the campaign began only in the middle of February this year. This was due to the lack of certainty concerning the main candidates for parliamentary seat in the district. Despite a big number of registered candidates, only a small part of them demonstrated a real electoral activeness. Thus, the following candidates were engaged in active campaigning: Victoriia Alieksieichuk (Servant of the People), Yuliia Svitlychna (independent), Victoriia Ptashnyk (European Solidarity), Tetiana Yehorova-Lutsenko (independent), Kyrylo Oksen (independent), Ihor Shvaika (AUU Svoboda), Oleksandr Didenko (independent), Tetiana Lazurenko (independent). These candidates used different forms of campaigning, met with the voters. Thus, 8 of 40 registered candidates launched full-fledged election campaigns in the district.
Since the beginning of the election process, OPORA's observers have been systematically monitoring the campaigning of MP candidates and comparing their intensity. Outdoor political advertising, distribution of printed campaign materials, political advertising on television and radio, and online campaigning were assessed separately.
According to the data from OPORA's observers, the following candidates have launched the largest campaigns at the moment this report was published:
- in outdoor political advertising: Victoria Alieksieichuk (Servant of the People), Tetiana Yehorova-Lutsenko (independent), Kyrylo Oksen (independent), Victoriia Ptashnyk (European Solidarity), Yuliia Svitlychna (independent);
- in the distribution of printed campaign materials: Victoria Alieksieichuk (Servant of the People), Tetiana Yehorova-Lutsenko (independent), Kyrylo Oksen (independent), Victoriia Ptashnyk (European Solidarity), Yuliia Svitlychna (independent), Oleksandr Didenko (independent), and Ihor Shvaika (AUU Svoboda).
- in regional online campaigning: Yuliia Svitlychna (independent);
- in printed media: Yuliia Svitlychna (independent), Victoria Alieksieichuk (Servant of the People), Victoriia Ptashnyk (European Solidarity), Tetiana Yehorova-Lutsenko (independent).
- meetings with voters: Victoria Alieksieichuk (Servant of the People), Tetiana Yehorova-Lutsenko (independent), Yuliia Svitlychna (independent), Victoriia Ptashnyk (European Solidarity), Ihor Shvaika (AUU Svoboda), Tetiana Lazurenko (independent), Kyrylo Oksen (independent).
OPORA's observers inform that campaigning on the internet and social networks has a strong impact on the course of the election campaign. According to OPORA's observers, Yuliia Svitlychna spends the most on advertising in social networks (approximately $ 3,700 on Facebook). Viktoriia Ptashnyk, Viktoriia Alieksieichuk, Ihor Shvaika also use paid advertising, but less actively.
Yuliia Svitlychna, Viktoriia Alieksieichuk, Viktoriia Ptashnyk, Tetiana Yehorova-Lutsenko, Ihor Shvaika actively post on their Facebook pages and distribute their support materials in local internet groups.
The competitiveness of election process was sufficiently high and pluralistic until candidates Victoriia Alieksieichuk (Servant of the People) and Oleksandr Didenko (independent) announced they withdraw from the vote. Once nominees or members of influential political parties have left the race, we predict the decrease in campaign intensity.
Violations of election legislation and standards
During the election process, OPORA's observers have detected a number of incidents with features of law violations and/or violations of democratic election standards. These incidents include violation of the procedure for campaign materials placement, dissemination of non-marked campaigning materials, false information about candidates, smear campaigning, and damaging advertisement carriers that contain campaigning materials of candidates. This constituency faced a traditional problem of mixing campaign activities and official activities by some MP candidates. Thus, observers detected some facts that could be explained as involvement of the Head of Kharkiv OSA Oleksii Kucher in the election campaign, before the candidate from the Servant of the People party withdrew.
Smear campaigning and dissemination of false information about MP candidates
- On 24 February 2020, OPORA's observers detected campaign materials saying that the fifth President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko and former Minister of Health Yliana Suprun support candidate Yuliia Svitlychna. Representatives of the independent candidate denied their involvement in the production of such materials and affirmed that advertisement marking was forged. Active dissemination of printed materials containing false information about political stand of the candidate can be explained as competitive trying to mislead the voters and reduce the winning chances for the electoral subject.
- On 26 February 2020, OPORA's observers detected printed materials in the city of Krasnohrad against the Svoboda's candidate Ihor Shvaika. The leaflet contained allegations of the candidate's involvement in "raider seizures of enterprises in Kharkiv oblast and stock fraud".
According to the Article 74(10) of the Law of Ukraine on Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine, „It shall be prohibited to spread deliberately false or libelous information about a party that is an electoral subject or about an MP candidate if its false or libelous nature has been established by a court“.
Violation of the campaigning procedure
- In the city of Krasnohrad, officers of the National Police of Ukraine have drawn up a report on administrative offenses upon the placement of campaigning leaflets in support of candidate Yuliia Svitlychna in district #179. The protocol was drawn up under Article 212-14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of Ukraine, which establishes a liability for the violation of campaign materials or political advertising placement procedure or for their placement in places prohibited by the law by a citizen.
- OPORA's observers appealed to the National Police of Ukraine regarding the distribution of printed campaign materials in support of independent candidate Kyryl Oksen, which were not marked as required by the law. The candidate himself denied his involvement in the production of these materials, although observers received them personally in a candidate's campaign tent.
Damage to campaign materials of candidates or outdoor advertisement carriers
- In the city of Krasnohrad, OPORA's observers noticed damaged city light billboards bearing political advertising in support of candidate Viktoriia Aliaksieichuk, nominated by the Servant of the People party. Such actions by unknown persons may be classified as obstruction of the candidate's right to campaign.
OPORA's observers noted that candidate from the Servant of the People party Viktoriia Alieksieichuk did not separate clearly her status of a candidate from being an advisor to the Head of Kharkiv OSA. Yuliia Svitlychna, for her part, combined campaigning activities with her position of a councillor at Kharkiv Oblast Council. Such practices may adversely affect the adherence to standards of political impartiality at public administration as the use of power status and public finances in the electoral interests. Candidate Viktoriia Alieksieichuk held joint events with the Head of Kharkiv Oblast State Administration Oleksii Kucher in the constituency. Although this practice was not widespread, OPORA calls on all electoral subjects and local officials to ensure proper standards of public positioning and governmental activity in the election process. Candidate's rivals also informed OPORA about possible involvement of local government officials in the election campaign of Yuliia Svitlychna, taking into account her ties with local elites during her work as head of oblast state administration.
According to OPORA, violations detected as of today do not distort the democratic and competitive nature of the election process. The absence of voter bribery incidents in the district is definitely a good fact. However, OPORA believes that law-enforcement agencies of Ukraine should ensure a complete investigation of each detected violation and ensure proper response to the information about candidates failing to comply with law requirements while the election process lasts. Adherence to the principle of political impartiality and non-involvement in the election process by local authorities is equally important.
Transparency and accountability of election funds
According to the legislation of Ukraine, any campaign expenses must be covered exclusively from campaign accounts of MP candidates. Each candidate is obliged to open such campaign account, and the CEC must publish its details in regional and local printed mass media. Managers of campaign accounts are obliged to submit to the DEC an interim and final financial reports on the receipt and use of election funds of an MP candidate. The DEC sends these reports to the CEC and the NAPC. Legislative requirements for financial statements of candidates are aimed to prevent shadow financing of the election process, ensure the principle of equal opportunity for electoral subjects, and accountability for campaign expenses.
OPORA monitors information on the opening of campaign accounts by MP candidates. At the time this report was published, we had information about the opening of campaign accounts by 26 MP candidates, while information about several other candidates was still being verified. Thus, some of the registered candidates ignored the legislative requirements for opening of election fund accounts. This problem is not new to Ukrainian elections and requires additional legislative and administrative efforts to increase the transparency of election funds.
Election disputes in courts
The Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal considered a case #855/6/20 against registration of independent candidate Mykhailo Sokolov on the basis of information placed online affirming he has the Russian Federation citizenship. The court found no legal grounds to cancel the registration, since citizenship of other countries is not among registration restrictions. In addition, the court did not receive evidence of such candidate's citizenship. Instead, it received evidence that the State Migration Service checked the compliance of the obligation to terminate the citizenship of the Russian Federation in connection with the acceptance of citizenship of Ukraine by the candidate. The Central Election Commission had checked whether the specified candidate has citizenship of Ukraine and his residence in Ukraine for the last five years.
It should be emphasized that the case has not been widely covered by the media, and the publication of decisions on the portal http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/ is delayed for several days and with no names. Although we support the non-disclosure of information about participation of individuals in court proceedings through publication of decisions on the Unified State Register of Court Decisions, OPORA emphasizes that the election process is public. A candidate is not an individual in an election process, but a subject of the election process. There is also an inequality in the status of different electoral subject. For example, the register of court decisions does not depersonalize information about cancelling the registration of political parties, as well as challenges against their decisions, actions and inaction. Thus, decisions on cancellation or refusal of candidate registration, as well as challenges against decisions, actions, or inaction of an election candidate should not be depersonified. They should contain full information on a name, surname and patronymic of a candidate.
This issue was also highlighted in the Final Report of the ODIHR Election Observation Mission for the Presidential Election in Ukraine (31 March and 21 April 2019). The Mission concluded that although the Unified State Register of Judgments is online, the requirement to delete all personal data, including the names of applicants and respondents, prior to the publication of the decision, as the law demands, has limited its transparency. For example, all surnames were excluded from court decisions on lawsuits filed by candidates and against candidates, including cases on candidate registration, and the names of those guilty of electoral offenses were hidden. Besides that, the placement of court decisions in the online registry was delayed in average on five business days after the decision; the maximum delay was up to two weeks.
Despite the court decision, M. Yu. Sokolov refused to run for unknown reasons.
Recommendations
To the CEC
- Provide prompt communication and proper feedback to the district election commission in terms of clarifying specified procedures and peculiarities of the application of election law provisions that do not apply to other types of election.
- Inform the media and the interested public about the opening of campaign accounts by MP candidates.
To the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine
- Improve the Criminal Code of Ukraine and the Code of Administrative Offenses to guarantee the certainty of punishment for electoral crimes.
- Ensure prompt improvement of the Election Code in order to properly prepare for the upcoming local and national elections.
To local self-government bodies and officials
- Refrain from public activities and informational activities that have features of politically motivated support for electoral subjects.
To political parties
- Political parties, especially those receiving public donations, should show a greater interest in the election campaign. They should also actively exercise their exclusive functions related to the control of election administration and minimization of the risk of monopolized political influence over the work of election commissions.