During the last broadcasting "Discussion: This Year Elections" experts were talking about possible falsifications in the upcoming election campaign and possibilities of their prevention. The discussion was participated by Olha Aivazovska (CN OPORA) with Taras Berezovets (“Berta Communications”); Anatolii Boiko (CVU-Odesa) told about the official start of campaigning in regions.

Talking about possible falsification of parliament election results, Olha Aivazovska started from analysing the importance of 2012 election campaign. “Comparing these elections to the last local, first have larger historical significance, because they virtually end formation of vertical and horizontal state authorities at all levels: from local governments and Executive branch to Legislative branch. Therefore, the role of these elections is exceedingly important. Thus, a part of candidates and political forces are ready to fight for the victory at any cost.” – stated the expert. On her opinion, preconditions as well as actions of potential candidates already give reasons to say that upcoming elections will be quite problematic: “There are 3 things to influence most the election results. First – administrative resource (although we are being convinced that its role is to be minimal). Second – voter bribery. We are already receiving information that funds for bribing voters are being collected from business structures. The investigation of the Democratic Initiatives Fund on request of CN OPORA on the last elections showed, that every fifth Ukrainian citizen is ready to sell his voice for some money. That’s why the audience on which this mechanism is directed is still large. Third – the selective use of law in favour of or against a particular candidate.” 

On the other hand, Taras Berezovets thinks that 2012 Parliamentary elections are overrated. “This campaign will be definitely important, but we shouldn't overestimate its role.

This campaign will be definitely important, but we shouldn't overestimate its role

Why? There are some reasons. First of all, Ukraine came back to presidential-parliamentary system, and the role of the parliament became far less than during a term of the former president Yushchenko. Secondly, why do you think this parliament won’t be prematurely dissolved? To tell the truth, I’ve got an impression that it will be very “short time” parliament: it will work one or, maximally, two years.” He also thinks that the opposition won't manage to receive the majority in Verkhovna Rada of the next Convocation and will fight for 160-180 mandates not to let the Party of Regions form constitutional majority before 2015 Presidential elections. “Therefore, it’s obvious that future parliament will be anyway conflictive and very tense. That’s why it may be possibly dismissed... Thus, a price for membership of the Verkhovna Rada which pay deputies now - and ready to give away some millions of dollars - it s absolutely overestimated, it's throwing money down the drain." - thinks director of the company for personal and strategic consulting «Berta Communications». When talking about falsifications, Taras Berezovets expressed his hope that civic organizations will effectively control the process and reminded: “According to the legislation, all bulletins should be stored not less than 5 years. Therefore, if there is any sign of falsification, all falsifiers may be brought to book… Not many people remember the fact that by 2004 Presidential election results more than 800 people were brought to book. However, none of them have gone to jail, they received a suspended sentence. Nevertheless, if someone is forced to make a choice between making falsifications (even if paid for it) or get a sentence, although suspended, which would spoil the reputation – no one will take the risk.”

When comparing possibilities for election falsifications with proportional and mixed election systems Taras Berezovets agreed, that the last one is more risky, but it doesn't mean that they're going to be very spread: “There will be certainly more possibilities in majoritarian districts, but in every majoritarian district the influence of this administrative resource greatly differ.  Why? Because there are too little people left which know how to work with admin resource after Kuchma presidency. It's a delicate instrument, and not everybody can tune it. Of course, there will be violations, and more of them is possible in majoritarian districts than by lists." Olha Aivazovska continued the discussion: “Admin resource – is really delicate thing, but it’s delicate also because it may be not seen at all, I mean, it can be unnoticed, because some influence can be made even before beginning of the official election campaign. For example, so-called power admin resource, regulatory, material and technical, what means that some of deputies won’t be registered at all, worrying about their business of being afraid of law enforcement authorities.”

Administrative resource – is really delicate thing. It’s delicate also because it may be not seen at all, I mean, it can be unnoticed, since certain influence can be made even before beginning of the official election campaign

Coming to the discussion of double balloting, experts took different positions. Olha Aivazovska firmly supported the necessity of removing the respective norm of electoral law: “Firstly, this norm should be annulled. Although in 1998 was another law, it essentially proposed the same mixed electoral system, which is to be applied in 2012. There were precise directions on unequal conditions for candidates – if there is a right of parallel balloting, than a candidate which, for example, ballots only by lists, and a candidate which ballots by lists and in majoritarian district - they are not in equal conditions. When this law was under consideration, civic organizations, in particular ours and the Consortium of election initiatives declared that this nor is unconstitutional, and the President doesn’t have a right to sign the law as a guarantor of the Constitution.” According to the head of the board of CN OPORA, as a result, the procedure of reversal of the norm may be also manipulated, if corresponding presentation will appear during the election campaign: “If the election campaign will begin, and candidates will be registered, it can bring serious confusion and chaos into the campaign. However, candidates should understand that they can loose because of a decision of the Constitutional Court if they ballot by both list and district." Besides that, the exert noted, that the respective position concerning undesirable possibility of double-entry is enlightened in main documents, by which standards of democratic elections are determined: in the Venice Commission Code of Good Practice, Copenhagen Documents, Commitments for Democratic Elections in OSCE Participating States etc.

Taras Berezovets expressed another opinion: “In contrast to Olha, I don’t thin it’s a violation of democracy in balloting standards. If there is a mixed majority-proportional system, than a person can choose – to ballot by lists, in districts, or both. And it’s a false impression that this may badly influence only opposition. Why not the Party of Regions or communists? Excuse me, but they also have many bright leaders which would like to have a possibility to pass their people after them in lists and, at the same time, they have good chance of winning..." Than politologist shared his impression after auditing several districts, conducted by his company: “It appears to be a paradox – there are no bright majoritarians in opposition. I’m not talking about their funds or something else. There are just no people which would do something in districts allotted to them. And the Party of Region paradoxically has such majoritarians. It means that nobody prevented opposition form working, firstly, the last 10 years… Besides that, now – welcome to district. But they don’t want. Why? Because, in order to win elections, they will need to go to fields, talk to people, and answer not very pleasant questions, not only to the government, but also to the opposition. Give an alternative. But where is it?” Certain methods of falsification were also under the discussion.

When talking about them, Taras Berezovets reminded about the imperfection of the law: “There are three principles of successful campaign in a district, firstly, direct meetings with constituents, secondly, a tactic of so-called small good deeds and, thirdly, building pyramidal structures of buying. Here starts the most interesting – how to build them without breaking the law? Lotteries are forbidden. But we can make such astute system as exchanging shares. For example, all voters, participants of the pyramid, became shareholders, and they are told: you have a conditional share, its price, roughly speaking a thousand UAH. You can’t take it for yourself. Its price will rise up to 2 thousand UAH of cash for you if this candidate wins… Or even slier scheme. I as a candidate, for example, deliver pigs to my district, and give people 10 thousands of pigs and say, take, please, this 200 UAH and feed them, and after elections, if I win, I will buy all this animals - you made some work, and I pay a price higher than market price. Very nice scheme, and absolutely legal, by the way.”

Olha Aivazovska also spoke about the direct bribery of voters. “It worked very good on the last local elections. There was one pyramid in Sumy region revealed by journalists, but unfortunately it had no legal consequences.” The pyramid was made of agitators, hired by methods for network marketing, which in their turn worked with other agitators etc. Comparing with methods of falsifications in other countries, the expert added: “The question is, what is falsification? Falsification – is, as a matter of fact, the artificial influence on citizens’ will and its change. That is to say, if people are voting with one result, and we receive another one - than somehow this change should have been influenced. Through falsification, change of figures in protocols, or by putting bulletins, or through the voter bribery etc. Similar falsifications in Europe and developed countries are not tolerated. The other thing - manipulations with public opinion. Unfortunately, they are present everywhere.” When talking about preventing falsifications Olha Aivazovska noted: “Here we should take separate – before the election day and on it. Before the election day, of course, many things are likely to take place in districts, including voter bribery.

Before the election day, of course, many things are likely to take place in districts, including voter bribery

Here we have a good experience of the Russian federation on the last elections, when some fine journalists virtually recorded video, a pyramid of bribery, and provided some audio in order to show the world – how the bribery, voting and rising the rating of the ruling political forces were done. I think, that every voter, every competent voter, should be involved and do something similar.” The expert added, that the aim of civic organizations in this context is providing legal consultations and defense of people, which would provide the respective information in any form. “Concerning the election day – it’s rising voter turnout, or mobilization of elections. If you come to the polling station, you at least know that nobody else voted instead of you, and influence the process. In addition, this is activity on a polling station itself, because the voter is a subject of election process. If a violation concerns a voter directly, he can show it to an observer from any political force, or become a witness, or initiator of drawing up a protocol, and follow the situation with the document," - continued Olha Aivazovska. Another issue she was talking about – training of observers and representatives of political parties in DECs and polling stations. “It’s a pity when 40 people are sitting, like sparrows on a wire, and none of them can correctly write a document or appeal, or provide witnesses for a violation etc. It's very easy in such situation to make chaos on a polling station, prompt certain activities, give bulleting to people which are not in the list. Close to the end of voting, when everybody understand that voter turnout is lower, it’s possible to organize giving bulletins to someone else."

“It’s obvious that bribery exists. But then appears a question: nobody forces citizens. Why was implemented absolutely impudent, cynical scheme during the last presidential campaign in Kyiv? Excuse me, but citizens themselves willingly participate this scheme. It’s a pity that any of those voters was brought to criminal responsibility. Than, maybe, would be less willing to participate.” – stated Taras Berezovets. Similar thought expressed Olha Aivazovska: “For every kilo of buckwheat, which will become a deputy thanks to such schemes, is taking from your district of budget 200 kilo of buckwheat. Everybody should understand which consequences have similar trifle of money, which is applied.”

Anatolii Boiko, a head of Odesa regional branch of "Committee of Voters of Ukraine" told, that in Odesa may be created additional (fifth in the city) majoritarian district. “It’s actively discussed now… It will be just apotheosis of election technologies in Ukraine. Odesa never had so many districts, there always were four or two. Their boundaries coincided with boundaries of four existing in Odesa districts. Moreover, they want to join to the new district Illichivsk, totally another town”, - said expert. Taras Berezovets confirmed this fact: “As far as I know, this decision is virtually taken, a part of region will be joined to this district. It’s made for a certain candidate.”

Nevertheless, Anatolii Boiko noted, that is too early to talk firmly about a new Odesa district: “Now takes place a confrontation between the candidate for which new district is being created and another one. They should have been in different districts, but now informational confrontation began between them, and we have doubts if this issue is solved. In other way – why do they need to compete?” Continuing discussing regional aspects of the future election campaign, expert added: “A peculiarity of Odesa region compared to the West or Central regions will be to some extent absence of competition from opposition in majoritarians districts. Maybe, in every district will appear a group of bright politicians before the elections, which will worthily compete in elections, but the opposition is badly represented for now."

Coming back to formation of election districts, Olha Aivazovska noted: “I’d like to explain to the listeners why redistricting is so important issue. There are two things should be mentioned here. First is a classical thing called gerrymandering - drawing the boundaries of electoral districts in a way that gives one party an unfair advantage over its rivals using resources of a political party or administrative resources. The problem is that this district may be strangely formed with not standard territorial division, for example, when it will include more small settlements than large etc. What means that a district is going to provide definite support of one or another candidate because there is a big enterprise or agriculture manufacturing, plant etc. And what this candidate is left to do - conduct a bright election campaign and maximally mobilize this resource." Other issue the expert was talking about - size of districts: “The legislation provides, that a number of voters may be within 11%. And when it’s said that in Donetsk and Odesa region will appear more districts… The opposition is not very competitive there. It means, that in generally monopolized electoral districts (the Party of Regions is widely supported) will be districts with 88% of voters, and in places where exist competitive political forces and candidates, districts will have 112% of voters. It means that most of mandates will be from regions where is bigger support of ruling party. It’s also manipulative technology.”

“There is upper and lower limit of the number of voters in the district. The law permits, it was supported by the opposition. They did it themselves”, - noticed Taras Berezovers. “Now redistricting is discussed not only in Donetsk region, in Crimea or Odesa. In Kyiv is being discussed the possibility of creation 14 or even 16 districts from 12 effective ones. Let’s wait for the CEC decision. But remember one thing – there woun’t be less or more deputies than 225. And which they will be, is up to voters. And we can’t know for sure if representatives of the Party of Regions will win in their native regions.” – summed up politologist. Concerning electoral districts in Kyiv, Olha Aivazovska added: “Overseas polling stations and voters in majoritarian part will be included to districts of Kyiv city. Here is question whether these voters will be divided between different diststicts of the capital, or there will be created new disticts. We must understand, that majoritarian candidates which are to ballot in Kyiv, will be supported overseas, that’s why results of these elections may be very surprising.”

The discussion ended with another example of falsification methods and possible ways of fighting it, given by Olha Aivazovska: “I was in working group on improving electoral legislation. We made a proposition to strictly determine marks that are to be put opposite to a candidate’s name. A tick, a cross, or as on envelopes – but precisely, without extra things. It’s because verification on falsifications is made the next way. There is nth number of voters which sold their vote in district, for example, 15. A person which communicates with group connected to bribery works in a commission or as an observer. Electors which have sold their vote, put untypical marks in a bulletin – flowers, stars, rabbits, reverse ticks, whatever. Later is calculated those 15 people which have sold thier votes - where tick is untypical. Only than all these people receive their money. If there will be at least one absent, for example not 10 but 9, than none of them will receive money.”

The next broadcasting will be on 15February (Wednesday, beginning at 11.00). Experts will talk about legitimacy and transparency of elections, possible falsifications and mechanisms for fighting them. Radio listeners will have a chance to put questions or comment participants of the discussion - by the tel.: (044)536 -96 00 or e-mail: efir[at]radioera.com.ua

Series of radio programs “Discussion: This Year’s Elections” – is a common project of the Agency for Legislative Initiatives and “Radio Era FM”, which is implemented within the IFES’ Ukraine Electoral law reform program with the assistance of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).