The first report on the results of all-Ukrainian observation of Parliamentary elections – January - April 2012

 INTRODUCTION

The 2012 Parliamentary elections will be a critical test for democracy in Ukraine. The results will indicate whether or not Ukraine will become an EU member-state, whether or not the country's political forces are ready for open competition, and how well Ukrainian civic society has developed. The current political situation is quite tense due to open confrontation between the ruling and opposition parties, ‏‎‏which hampers the legislative process. However, despite the global economic crisis, Ukraine is one of the few European countries which plans to improve social standards prior to holding elections. Such decision is obviously not prudent.

Although the campaign season legal lasts for 90 days, and the campaign will officially commence on July 30, political forces have prematurely begun engaging voters in the regions.

Another feature of electoral activity is external and internal political struggle. The former traditionally includes active campaigning, an increasing amount of hidden political advertising in mass media, charitable activities, and working visits to regions organized by national politicians, while the latter includes internal party conflicts, which are less public and can be noticed in reorganization of party structures, groundless from the first sight change of leaders, and political migration of party activists, in particular heads of local governments. The latter will play a crucial role in 2012 Parliamentary elections. At the local-level, the nomination in single-mandate districts of candidates who have been selected by consensus of political parties remains vitally important The Dictatorship Resistance Committee and ruling political parties must find a compromise on redistricting. This process is often accompanied with conflicts, which sometimes become public.

CONCLUSIONS

1. Recent decisions by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine (CCU) regarding the unconstitutionality of the Article 22 (2) of Law of Ukraine "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine", which concerns the equal inclusion of overseas polling stations for all single-mandate districts created in the capital of Ukraine - Kyiv city, and the possibility of simultaneous inclusion in candidate lists for both nationwide multi-mandate and single-mandate majoritarian election districts, is a result of a politically-motivated approach to the issues regarding the electoral process, including preparation and adoption of the bill. Parallel nomination of candidates was harshly criticized by the community and the Civic Consortium for Election Initiatives, in particular, at public forums. At the same time, the decision of the CCU on overseas polling stations discriminates against some Ukrainian citizens on the basis of their place of residence.

3. The Civic Network OPORA notes the well-considered approach of the Central Election Commission in determining the number of electoral districts in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the 24 oblasts, cities of Kyiv and Sevastopol Drawing district boundaries in accordance with the principle of proportional correlation between the number of voters in each region and the total number of voters in Ukraine allowed to take into account demographic trends and prevent the spread of political abuses. At the same time, final evaluation of the territorial election organization could be made only after the redistricting process.

4. The premature start of election campaign demonstrates the ineffectiveness of interparty democracy in Ukraine. Appointment of candidates in single-mandate election districts is excessively centralized.

5. Political conflicts between potential competitors are not widespread. There have been rare cases of inter-party splits and defections, public confrontation among opposition political forces and registration of party clones.

6. Courts, taxation bodies and law enforcement agencies excessively scrutinize individuals who announce their intention to run in the elections. Such election activity is a key challenge for public authorities, who should be impartial and apolitical.

7. Potential candidates are primarily active in outdoor advertising, meetings with potential voters, organizing social, charity and protest activities involving young people, and campaign activities under the pretense of doing sociological and public surveys. They actively use charity to further their interests, which includes making citizens dependent upon welfare benefits. According to election legislation such charity may be regarded as voter bribery. OPORA maintains a positive attitude towards explanatory note given by the CEC concerning election campaign and indirect bribery of voters.

8. Political parties which expect to overcome the 5% threshold or approach it are the most active according to the results of sociological polls (According to research from the Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation, conducted from 30 March to 4 April2012). The high threshold for representation in Parliament and the mixed-electoral system used in Ukraine promote strong regional party activity. Political groups which would conduct their activities only in certain regions or territories may appear along with the domination of the most prominent parties. Such perspective will weaken the composition of Ukrainian Parliament and complicate the formation of national political programs.

9. The use of hidden advertising has increased several times, as well as the use of municipal mass media for the benefit of certain political parties. There were also documented violations of journalistic standards.

RECOMMENDATIONS

For the Central Election Commission

• to increase the transparency of its activities, to provide the public with full information on the preparation of draft decisions at all stages;
• to establish the practice of publishing draft decisions;
• systematically and timely inform national and international observers and representatives of mass media about the agendas of CEC meetings
• to publish shorthand records of Commission meetings on its official website, in order to fully inform the public about the decision-making process.

For political parties and candidates

• to organize public debates of candidates for Parliament, including local discussions and party primaries;
• to reveal planned campaign finance sources;

For People’s Deputies of Ukraine:

• not to amend the Law of Ukraine "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine";
• not to use their official positions for the benefit of personal electoral campaigns.

For Heads of Central and Regional government authorities:

• to make a public commitment of non-intervention in the election process;
• to ensure the possibility of monitoring government activity during election process, to provide free access for civic observers to public meetings and collegial deliberations of authorities.

RESONANCE DECISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

The decision by the Constitutional Court, concerning the right of candidates for simultaneous nomination in single-mandate majority districts and by party lists provided by the Law of Ukraine “On the Election of People’s Deputies”, is absolutely predictable. A similar provision was declared as unconstitutional in 1998 because it violated the principle of candidates' equality. OPORA is sure that the mixed election system puts subjects of the election process in unequal conditions, depending on whether they are nominated under party lists or under constituencies. On one hand, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine (CCU) quickly expounded the norm and didn't postpone consideration of the appeal until the beginning of candidate registration. On the other hand, the decision regarding the unconstitutionality of attaching overseas polling stations to all single-mandate constituencies in the capital restricts the constitutional rights of 400 thousand Ukrainian citizens abroad.

On 4-5 April 2012 the Constitutional Court of Ukraine passed two decisions, according to which some provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine" were declared unconstitutional. In particular, the provision on simultaneous nomination of candidates in majority electoral districts and by party lists, and the equal inclusion of overseas polling stations to all single-mandate election districts in Kyiv city.

The Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine No.7-рп/2012 (http://www.ccu.gov.ua/uk/doccatalog/list?currDir=173889) in response to the petition by 59 MPs of Ukraine the paragraph in Article 22 (2) of Law of Ukraine "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine" on equal inclusion of overseas polling stations to all single-mandate election districts formed in the capital of Ukraine - Kyiv city, was recognized as unconstitutional. The Constitutional Court of Ukraine justified its decision with three main conclusions:

• provisions of the Law according to which permanently residing or temporarily staying abroad citizens shall vote in single-mandate election district in Kyiv, don't secure representation of voters who reside in the capital;
• candidates for MPs of Ukraine, which are nominated in single-mandate election districts in Kyiv are not afforded equal opportunities, because their opportunities to engage voters residing or temporarily staying abroad are limited;
• legal requirements of equal inclusion of overseas polling stations to all single-mandate constituencies of Kyiv considering the ratio of voters who reside or stay abroad to voters in Kyiv, doesn't meet the standard deviation of the number of voters in single-mandate election district which is up to twenty percent from the average number of voters in single-mandate election districts.

Judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine Volodymyr Shishkin and Petro Stetsyuk in their written opinions, argued that the decisions were not politically motivated. Associations of Ukrainians living abroad publicly expressed their disagreement with this interpretation of the constitution and the deprivation of their right to vote in single-mandate constituencies. Declaring the aforementioned provisions of the law as unconstitutional and limiting the voting rights of Ukrainian citizens which live abroad. The Constitutional Court of Ukraine (CCU) failed to provide in its decision an explanation regarding the manner in which Ukrainians voting in overseas polling places will have their voting rights recognized and will vote in single-mandate majoritarian election districts. Therefore, the principle of equal voting rights was violated.

The Civic Network OPORA must admit that insufficient transparency in preparation of the law and agreement on certain positions between the political forces negatively affects the responsibility of politicians for results of certain compromising decisions. The Limitation of the rights of 400 thousand citizens is inconsistent with international practices regarding the resolution of such disputes. Voting for candidates in single-mandate majoritarian election districts by Ukrainian citizens abroad doesn't contradict the essence of parliamentary mandate and the principle of equal voting rights.

The Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine No.8-рп/2012 (http://www.ccu.gov.ua/uk/doccatalog/list?currDir=174122) in the case upon the constitutional petition of 51 MPs of Ukraine the provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine" on possibility of simultaneous inclusion of candidates in both nationwide multi-mandate and single-mandate majoritarian election districts, was recognized as unconstitutional.

The Constitutional Court of Ukraine justified its decision with the following arguments:

• a candidate for MP of Ukraine who has been included in his or her party's electoral-list has more opportunities for realization of his right to be elected, which violates the constitutional principle of equal voting rights concerning the candidate for MP of Ukraine, who will only run in single-mandate election district ;
• the principle of equal suffrage is violated, because a candidate may be supported by one voter twice, as long as the law allows candidates to simultaneously run in two separate districs ;
• election results cannot be equally influenced by voters when a person is simultaneously elected as MP of Ukraine in multi-mandate and single-mandate election districts.

When the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine approved the new wording of the Law "On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine", OPORA immediately reported on the unconstitutionality of one of its provision. The identical decision of the Constitutional Court No.1-рп/98 of 26.02. 1998 concerning the similar provision applied on 1998 and 2002 elections.

OPORA emphasizes, that the right to run in two election districts at the same time is a known political tactic aimed at solving internal party issues. Using this norm in Parliamentary elections will by no means assist in to realizing the principle of equal voting rights for voters or candidates.

THE CEC DECISION ON THE NUMBER OF ELECTION DISTRICTS IN REGIONS

The Central Election Commission carefully and professionally determined the number of single-mandate majoritarian election districts to be created in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, the 24 oblasts, the cities of Kyiv and Sevastopol. Having taken into consideration propositions from civic experts, the CEC divided 225 election districts among the regions, proceeding from the number of voters registered in every region and on the basis of transparent calculations. This approach enabled them t determine the optimum number of voters and secured equal opportunities for representation of their interests in Parliament. OPORA denotes, that the worst apprehensions of civic experts on concerning possible violations didn't come true.

From the beginning of the year the Central Election Commission has adopted 27 resolutions regulating certain legislative issues regarding the next Parliamentary elections, which are scheduled for October 28, 2012. The public was primarily interested in the creation of the 225single-mandatemajoritariandistricts. According tothe Law of Ukraine"On Elections of People's Deputies of Ukraine", the CEC was supposed to determine the number of single-mandate election districts (here in after – single-mandate districts) in the Autonomous Republic Crimea, oblasts, the cities of Kyiv and Sevastopol not later than 200 days before the voting day (the deadline - 10 April). The inclusion of overseas polling stations for the capital's electoral districts was predictably debatable, as long as this paragraph was appealed in the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. The creation of additional districts in Kyiv depended on its results. The other issue was the manner in which the number of single-mandate election districts was calculated in every region. A principle which could be used bothered both potential candidates and the public. The effective law doesn't provide clear criteria for the division and sets 12% possible deviation in every district in comparison to the average. Therefore, if the approach to this issue was of manipulative character and the number of territorial units was politically motivated, then the importance of the mandate in eastern and western Ukraine would disproportionately differ.

However, after the CCU adopted its decision, the CEC established the number of single-mandate majoritarian election districts to be created in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, 24 oblasts, Kyiv and Sevastopol cities in its Resolution of 9 April 2012 No.65 (http://www.cvk.gov.ua/pls/acts/ShowCard?id=27739&what=0). It worth to mentioning that a calculation method chosen by the Commission is the simplest and the most logical: the number of districts is proportional to the number of registered voters. There were no considerable deviations in the determined number of districts, in particular when counting fractional residuals within regions. The number of constituencies for elections in 2012 in most regions coincided with the figures of 2002, when elections to parliament were held on a similar mixed electoral system. 5 oblasts became the exception. In Donetsk oblast has two fewer districts, Luhansk - one less in comparison with the 2002 elections due to the demographic indicators and a decrease in the number of voters in the city of Kyiv, Kyiv and Ivano-Frankivsk oblasts have one district more following redistricting.

Region	The number of voters as of 31.03.2002	The number of election districts for 2002 elections	The number of voters as of 19.04.2012	The number of election districts for 2012 elections	Change
Autonomous Republic of Crimea	1 551 410	10	1 541 033	10	=
Vinnytsia oblast	1 381 801	8	1 297 161	8	=
Volyn oblast	777 857	5	784 960	5	=
Dnipropetrovsk oblast	2 824 467	17	2 711 940	17	=
Donetsk oblast	3 696 887	23	3 412 231	21	-2
Zhytomyr oblast	1 076 806	6	1 014 402	6	=
Zakarpattia oblast	905 573	6	960 018	6	=
Zaporizhzhya oblast	1 522 256	9	1 472 051	9	=
Ivano-Frankivsk oblast	1 053 110	6	1,080,123	7	+1
Kyiv oblast	1 443 912	8	1 463 201	9	+1
Kirovograd oblast	870 678	5	791 773	5	=
Luhansk oblast	1 959 922	12	1 830 556	11	-1
Lviv oblast	2 015 185	12	1 983 810	12	=
Mykolaiv oblast	952 383	6	938 612	6	=
Odesa oblast	1 837 578	11	1 833 194	11	=
Poltava oblast	1 285 334	8	1 208 757	8	=
Rivne oblast	854 559	5	871 124	5	=
Sumy oblast	1 015 296	6	945 722	6	=
Ternopil oblast	859 352	5	863 217	5	=
Kharkiv oblast	2 313 259	14	2 200 550	14	=
Kherson oblast	911 942	5	871 906	5	=
Khmelnytsk oblast	1 112 986	7	1 059 637	7	=
Cherkasy oblast	1 112 453	7	1 051 642	7	=
Chernivtsi oblast	698 760	4	704,075	4	=
Chernihiv oblast	992 313	6	893 486	6	=
Kyiv	2 078 744	12	2 159 363	13	+1
Sevastopol	298 838	2	308 603	2	=
Total:		225		225

The establishment of permanent single-mandate majoritarian districts is currently on the agenda. The CEC shall adopt its decision no later than one hundred and eighty days prior to election day (deadline - 30 April). Unfortunately the effective legislation contains no clear requirements and criteria of creating single-mandate districts in. As a result, the redistricting process can be tilted in favor of certain political parties or candidates. In classical electoral practices this tactic is referred to as “gerrymandering” which is the selective delimitation of election boundaries for establishing a political advantage for a particular party or group.

The Civic Network OPORA will analyze the decision of the CEC regarding the creation of the permanent single-mandate majoritarian election district which, according to the Commission chairman Volodymyr Shapoval, will be considered at the meeting on April 26.

ACTIVITY OF POTENTIAL CANDIDATES

Political forces which are expected to overcome 5% threshold (according to the results of sociological poll from the Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation, 30 March - 4 April) are the most active in nationwide scale (the Party of Regions, All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland", "Front for Change", the Communist party of Ukraine, All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda", and "UDAR"). Less active are parties and candidates which try hard to become more recognizable to voters ("Ukraine - Forward!"). Other political parties conduct their campaigns only in some oblasts and macro-regions of Ukraine. The Party of Regions is active in all oblasts of Ukraine. Oppositional political parties, such as All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland", Front for Change, All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda", UDAR, Civic Position, are undergoing organizational, resource and personnel transformations. They are campaigning through outdoor advertisement, meetings with potential voters, organization of social, charitable and protest activities involving young people, and campaigning activities under the pretense of doing sociological and public surveys. The political project of Nataliia Korolevska, known as “Ukraine – Forward!”, is notable for its false start. Oppositional parties may face some problems when nominating their candidates in regions due to lower approval ratings and sustainability in comparison to the party in power. Moreover, the absence of influential opposition candidates in eastern and southern oblasts, where the Party of Regions holds strong positions, may weaken the proper mutual control between competitors.

 

Parties and territorial units

In January-April 2012 the Party of the Regions, All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland", Front for Change, the Communist Party of Ukraine, All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda", UDAR, Ukraine - Forward!, began active election campaigns in most regions of Ukraine. Other political parties, in particular, the People's Party, Ukrainian Radical Party, European Party of Ukraine, Civic Position, are active only in some regions or oblasts. Implementation of the mixed election system will strengthen the regional activity of political parties which do not expect to overcome the election threshold or have weak representation in most Ukrainian oblasts. For example, the People's party is mainly focused on Zhytomyr oblast, where its leader V. Lytvyn may run in one of majoritarian districts (the Party of Free Democrats in Cherkasy and United Centre in Zakarpattia are in a similar situation).

The Party of Regions is well represented in most Ukrainian oblasts. In some regions, the heads of local government bodies have started their own image campaigns, along with the election campaigns of the parties in power B. Klimchuk – Volyn oblast, A. Mohylov – AR Crimea, A. Shyshatskyi – Donetsk oblast, O. Vilkul – Dnipropetrovsk oblast). Regional activity of other political parties is not equal due to the capacity of local representations and the presence of influential leaders. This tendency mostly concerns the All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland", UDAR, KPU, the All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda", Civic Position and others. Activity of O. Tiahnybok, the leader of the All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda", is most noticeable in Eastern and Southern regions, where he has little voter support and organizational structure.

Although the campaign has virtually started, some political forces (All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda", UDAR, All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland", Ukraine - Forward!, Front for Change) are still attempting to solve organizational problems connected to changing leaders in regional offices, inter-party conflicts, faction changes in local councils, etc. The integration of efforts on the regional level is accompanied by conflicts, and none of reached compromises has resulted in combining of employees and resources in practice.

Potential candidates are mostly active in outdoor advertisement, meetings with prospective voters, organizing social, charitable and protest activities involving young people, and campaign activities under the pretense of doing sociological and public surveys. Some local councils are involved in political discussions or confrontations (initiating the impeachment of the President of Ukraine by local councils of Western Ukraine, probability of early elections of Chernivtsi mayor, a conflict between local leaders of the Party of Regions and the Mayor of the city of Horlivka in Donetsk oblast, confrontation inside All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" in Ternopil oblast etc.)

The most active potential majoritarian candidates may be divided into 3 groups: candidates from parties, self-nominated candidates, and those who are still uncertain about own party affiliation. The majority of potential candidates are current MPs of Ukraine, which offers them certain advantages. The latter are conducting local campaigns under the pretext of executing their duties. The situation in Zakarpattia oblast is very specific due to the issue of dividing election districts between the Party of Regions and United Center.

Personalities and electoral process - regional view

Most potential majoritarian candidates don't affirm their intention to run, which is due to the centralized process of taking decisions on redistricting issues. Famous politicians who openly announce their decisions in majoritarian districts (Oleksandr Yefremov, Viktor Baloha, Vasyl Onopenko, Taras Chornovil, Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, Oleksandr Moroz, Petro Poroshenko, Pavlo Zhebrivskyi, Stanislav Nikolaienko) and a number of local leaders are exceptions.

Opposition parties may have problems in nominating candidates in oblasts where they traditionally are less popular than the Party of Regions. We can already see the insufficiency of powerful opposition figures in eastern and southern Ukraine from current campaign activities. Conditions for campaigning for the Party of Regions are dramatically different in oblasts where it has traditionally low ratings. In contrast to previous elections, the Party of Regions may rely to a much greater extent on candidates involved in local business and administrative officials, as well as on self-nominated candidates. This situation endangers standards of competitive elections, because the mutual control of competitors will be weakened due to the absence of influential majoritarian candidates in the primary regions supportive of the Party of Regions.

The nomination of current mayors of oblast centers and heads of local councils in majoritarian election districts is a very interesting issue. The head of Zakarpattia oblast state administration Oleksandr Ledyda was publicly announced to be nominated in a majoritarian district. Mayors Volodymyr Saldo (Kherson), Viktor Anushkevychus (Ivano-Frankivsk), Serhii Odarych (Cherkasy), Volodymyr Deboi (Zhytomyr) will likely be nominated. There are solid grounds to expect the nominations for the heads of the oblast councils of Zakarpattia, Ternopil, Ivano-Frankivskto be Ivan Baloha, Oleksii Kaida, Oleksandr Sych, respectively. The head of the Volyn oblast state administration Borys Klimchuk will probably participate in elections, as well as the Deputy heads of Mykolaiv, Zakarpattia, Dnipropetrovsk oblast state administrations. The nomination of local officials may increase conflict in campaigns because political division in the parliamentary elections will be worsened by local interests and confrontations.

Given the campaign activity in the regions of Ukraine we can highlight potential majority-candidates (the most prominent and active leaders are listed):

The Party of Regions

 

MPs of Ukraine: Oleksandr Zats, Volodymyr Tolstenko, Vladyslav Zabarskyi (Autonomous Republic of Crimea); Hryhorii Kaletnyk (Vinnytsia obl.), Hryhorii Smitiukh (Volyn obl.); Tetiana Bakhteieva, Vitalii Bort, Ihor Shkyria, Mykola Yankovskyi, Vladyslav Lukianov, Serhii Kliuiev, Denys Omelianovych, Oleksii Bilyi, Yukhym Zviahilskyi (Donetsk obl.), Serhii Moshak (Zakarpattia obl.),Yaroslav Sukhyi, Volodymyr Bohuslaiev, Artem Pshonka (Zaporizhia obl.), Oleksandr Yefremov, Oleksii Kunchenko, Volodymyr Vecherko (Luhansk oblast); Petro Pysarchuk (Lviv obl.), Volodymyr Nakonechnyi (Mykolaiv oblast), Andrii Derkach (Sumy obl.); Oleksandr Feldman, Iryna Berezhna, Iryna Horina (Kharkiv obl.); Mykola Bahraiev, Oleksandr Zhuravko (Kherson obl.); Ihor Savchenko (Cherkasy obl.); Mykola Romaniuk, Ivan Popesku (Chernivtsi obl.), MPs of Ukarine Serhii Andros and Eduard Prutnyk (Chernihiv obl.)

Local Leaders: head of Volyn Oblast State Administration Borys Klimchuk (Volyn obl.); Deputy head of Oblast State Administration Ivan Stupak, Deputy head of Oblast Council Andrii Shybko, Deputy Mayor of Dnipropetrovsk Ihor Tsyrkin (Dnipropetrovsk obl.), head of NGO "Civil Initiative" Valerii Omelchenko (Donetsk obl.), Mayof of Zhytomyr Volodymyr Deboi (Zhytomyr obl.), head of the Oblast State Administration Oleksandr Ledyda, Deputy heads of the Oblast State Administration Ivan Bushko and Ivan Kachur, Head of Regional State Administration Mykhailo Shelever, Deputy of the Oblast council Stepan Derkach (Zakarpattia obl.); deputy of the Oblast council Bohdan Hdychynskyi (Ivano-Frankivsk obl.); deputy of the Oblast council Serhii Horokhov (Luhansk obl.); Deputy head of Oblast State Administration Vitalii Travianko, Mayor of Voznesensk Yurii Herzhov (the Party of Regions), head of the faction the Party of Regions in Mykolaiv city-councilArtem Illiuk (Mykolaiv obl.); Mayor of Poltava Oleksandr Mamai (Poltava obl.), Deputy head of Oblask Council Oleh Boiaryntsev (Sumy obl.); former head of Oblast State Administration Mykhailo Tsymbaliuk (Ternopil obl.), deputy of Kharkiv city council Anatolii Denysenko (Kharkiv obl.), Mayor of Kherson Volodymyr Saldo (Kherson obl.);

Representatives of central government, public and private corporations:

Chairman of "Naftogaz Ukraine" Yevgeny Bakulin (Mykolaiv oblast);

Chairman of the State Reserve Agency of Ukraine Alexei Lelyuk (Poltava oblast);

Chairman of the State Forestry Committee of Ukraine Mykola Shershun (Rivne oblast);

Chairman of the Federation of Employers of Ukraine Dmytro Firtash (Chernivtsi oblast).

United opposition (All-Ukrainian Union “Fatherland”, Front for Change, People's Self-Defense and others)

 

MPs of Ukraine: Serhii Pashynskyi (Zhytomyr obl.), Ivan Stoika, Serhiia Kameniash (Zakarpattia obl.), Taras Stetskiv, Serhii Kurpil, Andrii Shkil, Oleksandr Hudyma, Andrii Parubii (Lviv obl.); Viktor Matchuk, Serhii Koshyn (Rivne obl.), MP of Ukraine Viktor Shemchuk (Ternopil obl.), Oleh Lukashuk (Khmelnytsk obl.), vice speaker of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Mykola Tomenko (Cherkasy obl.), Hennadii Moskal (Chernivtsi obl.), Valerii Dubil (Chernihivtsi obl.).

The personal activity of opposition representatives in electoral districts is limited by the incompleteness of discussion regarding the nomination of common candidates.

The Communist Party of Ukraine (KPU)

MPs of Ukraine: Volodymyr Kravchenko and Yevhen Volynets (Donetsk obl.); Valerii Bevz (Vinnytsia obl.) Alla Aleksandrovska (Kharkiv obl.).

KPU has officially stated that oblast committees of the party have determined the list of candidates in all electoral districts, but its publication is delayed until the end of the redistricting process.

All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda"

The leader of All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" Oleh Tiahnybok publicly informed that they have no majoritarian candidates, which would start the election campaign before the Dictatorship Resistance Committee makes compromising decisions. However, active potential majoritarian candidates from this political party are noticed in Ivano-Frankivsk and Ternopil regions.

The People's Party

MPs of Ukraine: Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Volodymyr Lytvyn (Zhytomyr obl.), Viktor Baranov (Zaporizhia obl.), Serhii Tereshchuk (Cherkasy obl.). A businessman and former MP of Ukraine, Ihor Yeremeiev (Volyn obl.), is also campaigning.

United Centre

This party uniquely campaigns solely in in Zakarpattia oblast. The party will nominate in this oblastMinister of Emergencies of Ukraine Victor Baloga, deputy of Oblast Council Pavlo Baloga, MP of Ukraine Vasyl Petovka, rector of Uzhgorod National University Mykola Vehesha, well-known neurosurgeon Volodymyr Smolianko.

Other Parties:

The Ukraine of the Future: party Chairman Stanislav Oliynyk (Dnipropetrovsk obl.);

The Radical Party: party Chairman, MP of Ukraine Oleh Liashko (Zhytomyr obl.);

The Our Ukraine: party Chairman Valentyn Nalyvaichenko (Ternopil obl.);

The Party of Free Democrats: Serhii Odarych (Cherkasy obl.);

United Left and Peasants: party Chairman Stanislav Nikolaienko (Kherson obl.), Deputy Chairman of the party Yosef Vinsky (Khmilnytsi obl.);

Ukrainian Platform "Sobor": party Chairman, MP of Ukraine Pavlo Zhebrivskyi;

Renaissance Party (“Vidrodzhennia”): entrepreneurs Bohdan and Jaroslav Dubnevych (Lviv obl.);

Party "Union": Lev Myrymskyi (AR Crimea).

Self-nominated candidates: Minister of Economic Development and Trade of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, former Chairman of the Supreme Court Vasyl Onopenko (according to his appeal in Vinnytsia or Chernivtsi obl.), former Minister of Justice Mykola Onischuk (Zhytomyr obl.), MP of Ukraine Ihor Palytsia (Volyn obl.), entrepreneur Zahid Krasnov (Dnipropetrovsk obl.), former Mayor of Zaporizhia Yevhen Kartashov (Zaporozhia obl.), Chairman of the group "Reforms for the Future" Ihor Rybakov (Chernihiv obl.), former Minister of transport Mykola Rudkovsky (Chernihiv obl.), MP of Ukraine Bohdan Gubskyi (Cherkasy obl.), MP of Ukraine Taras Chornovil (city of Kyiv).

REGIONAL CONFLICTS CONNECTED TO THE START OF the ELECTION CAMPAIGN

Some incidents that are directly related to the potential candidates indicate the beginning of active campaigning. Although such incidents are presently rare, as the official start to the campaign season approaches they may hinder the realization of the principle of competitive elections should they increase. Organizational conflicts follow the restructuring of local branches of parties and the division of future districts among candidates. It characterizes oppositional as well as pro-regime bloc. Conflicts also appear between different influential groups within one political party. Political migration processes which result in changes in party orientation by officials in local governments are still present. Potential candidates are convinced that inspections of taxation bodies and law enforcement authorities are directly connected to the beginning of the election campaign. There were also examples of limiting citizens' right to peaceful assembly through the judicial system or refusal to rent facilities to some politicians and parties for organization of the meetings with voters.

Organizational conflicts and distribution of districts between candidates

Mixed election system and the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine regarding the unconstitutionality of the simultaneous nomination of a candidate in majoritarian district and by party lists, is a strong motivation for politicians to choose the place for nomination. Primaries, as an instrument of transparent selection of the most perspective candidates in Ukrainian parties have been used primarily as advertising. The process of dividing a district between candidates from one party, or a group of political organizations which agree to collude during elections, is not transparent. This tendency is usual not only for oppositional parties which agree to coordinate efforts on the national level, but also for the party in power. For example, in the single-mandate majoritarian election district centered in Sarny in the Rivne region, two representatives of All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland" will simultaneously run for the Parliament: Mykola Kucheruk as the candidate from the united opposition and the self-nominated Alexander Danylchuk. In Ternopil oblast, two members of the Party of Regions, MP Orest Muts and Chairman of the Board at UkrInBank Volodymyr Klymenko, who is supported by the local administration,will bid for one of the northern constituencies. In Zakarpattia oblast there are rather strained relations between the Party of Regions and United Centre. Local mass media has openly reported on negotiations between these two parties before and stated that every party would take three districts. Ultimately they did not manage to come to the agreement.

Misunderstandings regarding the Dictatorship Resistance Committee (KOD) emerged at the beginning of the year when the three largest opposition parties (All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland", All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" and Front for Change) signed a collusion agreement during the campaign. Other representatives of the aforementioned Committee in Lviv oblast were dissatisfied with this move. They were not formally invited to sign the agreement, which was instead declared to be open. As a result, in March 2012, 8 political parties (Our Ukraine, People's Movement of Ukraine (Rukh), Ukraine United, Ukrainian People's Party (UNP), Reforms and Order Party (PRP), Party of Motherland Defenders) reported their own collusion agreements. On 23 March 2012, representatives from the Lviv section of the Ukrainian People's Party (UNP) were excluded from the Dictatorship Resistance Committee (KOD). The decision was made after they supported giving a vote of nonconfidence to the Mayor of Lviv oblast council Mtkhailo Kostiuk. Three council members from the UNP were at odds with other opposition parties, which may result in the motion failing In Rivne oblast the UNP caused a conflict in the Dictatorship Resistance Committee, because a leader of oblast office of the party Svitlana Nikolina publicly objected to the principle of choosing candidates for nomination in majoritarian districts, which were chosen in the capital but not locally.

Institutional rotation prior to the beginning of campaign, accompanied by public or hidden confrontation is quite common. On the one hand, prior to the formation of headquarters, a party organization should review its own sustainability before elections, and on the other hand, the results of this type of audit are sometimes ambiguous. For example, the local department of justice office refused to change executives of Sokyriany rayon office (Chernivtsi oblast) of All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland", on the grounds that similar documents had been already submitted by another group of people. These people turned out to be the former party-members of "Batkivshchyna", officials of rayon state administration which were excluded from this political party. Although the registration of political clones was revealed, the department of justice didn't take any measures to restore order, even after receiving information about fake reports and an election conference. In the Cherkasy oblast office of All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda", on the contrary, unjustified changes have been made in administrative board of the organization. The deputy of Ternopil oblast council, Eduard Leonov, who is a former member of the PORA party and chairman in Crimea office of All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda", was chosen for chairman position in oblast election headquarters of All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" instead of Serhiy Rudyk, the former leader of the party PORA, and Deputy mayor of Kyiv Leonid Chernovetskyi. Yurii Botnar was appointed as the acting-head of oblast office of the organization. He is the former deputy tead of the oblast office of All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" on youth policy and headed Uman city office of the party and press-service of regional office. The former head of the All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" in Cherkasy oblast, Tetiana Chornomaz, was appointed as an adviser to Oleh Tiahnybok in Cherkasy oblast. Mykhailo Vakulenko, who was the head of the Cherkasy office of the party for many years, was also dismissed from his position.

Local-level party-switching, typical in smaller cities, by certain politicians is sometimes accompanied by statements of the outside pressure. For example, Oleksandr Sin, who is the Mayor of Zaporizhia, was a candidate from the party "Fatherland", but recently joined the Party of Regions. In December 2010 Mr. Sin suspended his membership in the opposition party and on 21 March 2012 he became a member of the party in power. At the same time, the Mayor of Netishyn in Khmelnytsk oblast Olha Omelchuk dismissed mayors who didn't represent interests of the Party of Regions. At the beginning of March, mayors of three company towns of nuclear power plants in Ukraine were suspended from the execution of their duties: Andrii Stulin (from the city of Yuzhnoukrainsk in Mykolaiv oblast), Olha Omelchuk (Netishyn in Khmelnytsk oblast) and Serhii Anoshchenko (Kuznetsovsk in Rivne oblast).

On 27 March 2012, the mayor of Oleksandrivsk (under the administrative jurisdiction of the city of Luhansk) was expelled from the Luhansk office of the Party of Regions "due to bad manners." Mr. Hrekov sharply criticized Luhansk mayor Serhii Kravchenko andleaders of the Party of Regions for their personnel policy and intended to participate in parliamentary campaign in one of majoritarian districts of the city. A similar conflict can be observed in Stakhanov which is located in Luhansk oblast. The city's mayor Yurii Borysov (independent) often criticizes the leadership of the region and supports a campaign to collect signatures to recall deputies Hanna Ukolova, Olena Prystupa, Anrey Dmitriev, Maxim Maslyk of the Stakhanov City Council (the Party of Regions members, elected in majoritarian districts). According to experts, the aforementioned process is directly connected to the creation of favorable conditions for deputy Serhii Shakhov of Luhansk city council to run in majoritarian district in the city of Stakhaniv in Pervomaisk rayon. On 7 April a community meeting took place in recreation center "Nika" in Stakhanov city on the issue of organizing a local referendum "On early termination of powers of the Stakhanov city Mayor". Serhii Zhevlakov, mayor of Stakhanov from 2006 to 2010, and a member of the Party of Regions, was chosen as a head of the initiative group.

Hindering the conduction of peaceful assemblies and meetings with voters has recently become increasingly noticeable, especially in the eastern regions. The leader of All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda", Oleh Tiahnybok, declared that he was denied previously promised premises for meeting with voters in Kharkiv and Luhansk. The office of the UDAR party in Novoselytsia in Chernivtsi oblast was, without explanation, forbidden to conduct meeting in the local palace of culture. In Zaporizhia, a campaign planned by activists of the Front for Change, All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" and All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland" was prohibited through a court-order. The "Fatherland" and "Svoboda" parties have publicly announced that their activities in Kharkiv Oblast have been hindered. The Kharkiv District Administrative Court considered the petition of City council and decided to enact a prohibition on holding rallies near the Kharkiv Court of Appeals, where the trial on the ex-prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko began on April 19, starting from April 7^th and lasting indefinitely. The City Council also appealed to the court with a petition to prohibit the conduction of rallies near the Court of Appeals and the Kachanivska penal colony. The Kyiv office of the All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland" MP Andrii Kozhemiakin, 5 Kharkiv regional offices of All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland", Kharkiv office of All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" and Kharkiv oblast Committee for the Protection of Human Rights announced rallies for April 18th. On April 18^th, the Kharkiv District Administrative Court considered the petition of the City Council and prohibited the rallies.

Inspections by the regulatory and tax authorities, resonant judgments

Potential candidates, some of whom publicly declared their readiness to participate in Parliamentary elections are convinced that they face increased scrutiny from tax and law enforcement bodies as a result of their political activities their political activities. Courts play important role in these conflicts. For example, criminal proceedings were initiated against the director and chief accountant of the enterprise "Budmekhanizatsiia" in Kherson, which is connected to the MP Yurii Odarchenko. They are accused of tax evasion from the year 2005 to 2011, even though the organization had already passed all related inspections. Moreover, the taxation body demands a large sum of money from the enterprise which belogs to Mr. Odarchenko. The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) explained its inspection in connection to exposed "instances of fictitious business". A case with searches conducted by SBU in Volyn region became the most known. Searches were conducted in offices which belong to businessman Ihor Yefremov, a member of the People's Party, who had announced his participation in elections. The conflict situation has arisen because of not returned loan to "Nadra" bank. Firms owned by Vasyl Stoliar, a member a deputy of the Volyn Oblast council who has announced his intention to participate in the coming elections, have also been raided several times in the last month. The similar situation occurred with agricultural base of a potential candidate for MP Arcadiy Kornatsky. Ltd. "Agrofirm of Kornatski" is being inspected by the tax service, and a flat of the businessman Kiev was searched as well.

The trial against the head of Kovalivka local council, a member of "Svoboda" Yury Bublyk, was held in Poltava oblast. "Svoboda", headed by Mr. Bublyk, during 2010 elections received 18 mandates of 30 in Kovaliv village council, which has 11 settlements subordinate to it. Poltava rayon court sentenced Mr. Bublyk to three years of probation and barred him from holding leadership positions. Mr. Bublyk is charged with causing budget losses in amount of 31,000 UAH, which, according to the court decision, were illegally used to audit a piece of land which was allocated by his predecessors. The sentence, if not appealed, will not prevent him from participating in parliamentary elections.

PARTICIPATION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS IN POLITICAL ACTIVITY

Long before the official start of the election campaign in Ukraine, local authorities intensified activities aimed at promoting and supporting regional candidates and parties who are considered potential participants in the parliamentary elections. The most common phenomenon recorded by OPORA observers was the use of authority and resources by officials for campaigning on behalf of individual candidates or political parties. In addition, the practice of using various social initiatives, which take their funding from the state budget for advertising certain politicians or parties has become increasingly popular. These accused local officials (heads of administrations and mayors, especially), are using their official positions to campaign for certain candidates or parties. Ukrainian legislation facilitates such incidents and does not establish restrictions on campaigning before the official start of the campaign.

In response to this problem, , the head of the Oblast State Administration (OSA) in Sumy oblast, Yurii Chmyr, in February ordered local officials to hold information days throughout the region. According to the document, chairmen of district state administrations and mayors must organize unified information activities with personnel on every second and fourth Thursday of month. The official purpose of the information days is to satisfy the constitutional right of the public to receive information regarding the implementation of state policy priorities, and the status of socio-economic development in the region. The mandate establishing the sessions was personally approved by the head of the Sumy OSA. Heads of Rayon State Administrations and structural units of the Oblast State Administration are required to respond to suggestions and comments made during the information days and provide data on the results to the Public Relations Department. For example, on April 13the, Sumy OSA has focused on the discussion of the following topic: "A Message of the President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine "On the internal and external situation of Ukraine in 2011" and "Improving the competitiveness and development of the region." Thus, organization of such meetings before and during the election campaign is used for systematic campaigning by administration officials and municipalities of Sumy oblast.

The similar activity is noted in Chernivtsi oblast, where the Main Department of Health Care of the Chernivtsi Oblast State Administration disseminated a letter urging to promote new social initiatives of the President of Ukraine in all health care facilities.

The Head of OSA in Volyn oblast Boris Klimchuk openly campaigns for current MPs Adam Martyniuk, Hryhorii Smitiukh and Ihor Palytsia during his speeches. The "Governor" campaigns for these politicians in exchange for lobbying in favor of the oblast. A similar case is noted in Kherson oblast, where the head of OSA publicly announced his support for the mayor of the oblast center Volodymyr Saldo in one of the majoritarian districts.

The mayor of oblast center in Kharkiv oblast Hennadii Kernes conducted meetings with citizens in 8 rayons from 27 March to 19 April in order to solve problems of veterans and pensioners. Activities were participated by heads of administrations and departments of the City Council and potential majoritarian candidates from the Party of Regions. All eight meetings were widely broadcasted in mass media.

A slogan of All-Ukrainian Union "Svoboda" was placed on billboards with Easter greetings from the head of Ternopil Oblast Council Oleksii Kaida. Activities, conducted under the protection of the Head of Dnipropetrovsk Oblast State Administration Oleksandr Vilkul, are decorated with flags and balloons of the Party of Regions by design - in white and blue colors. In joint administrative premises of Rivne OSA and Oblast Council everybody interested may watch newspapers of the Party of Regions which are lying in the checkroom.

Some parties and candidates intentionally use state or regional projects (programs) in order to gain support of the certain categories of voters (pensioners, youth, parents). The vast majority of these projects are situational and aimed at demonstrating the direct care of citizens by the authorities who want to get parliamentary seats.

Thus, the Party of Regions in collaboration with the Council of Ministers of Crimea initiated a project "Social card," in the framework of which there was signed a memorandum of understanding with representatives of major trading networks. According to the document, retailers have committed to provide citizens entitled to benefits a discount on goods of not less than 7%. To implement the program 750 thousand UAH were allocated from the budget of Crimea. Kherson city target program "Social Security-2012" is used to promote the Party of Regions. It is amended at each session for helping the certain individuals and institutions which are always advertised as a gift from the party in power.

CAMPAIGNING BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF THE ELECTION PROCESS

Political parties and some politicians started the election campaign long time before the term specified by the law. Although it formally doesn't violate Ukrainian legislation, this contradicts the principle of equal opportunities. At the same time, campaigning with spreading goods, services, money, according to the corresponding legislation, regards as direct or hidden bribery of voters and should be punished in accordance with the administrative and criminal legislation. Unconscientious practices of campaign activities cast doubt on the willingness of individual candidates for free and fair competition. In addition, the media has increased the number of ordered image materials. Despite the electoral districts are not formed, potential candidates have already been engaging potential voters.

Campaign tendencies 

1. Outdoor advertising is actively used in all regions. Such means of propaganda are new for political projects. Candidates greet voters with public and religious holidays, use billboards to increase recognizability of political forces. In regions, where certain parties don't have enough support, or voters don't accept their ideology, candidates fail to mention their party affiliation. However, if the rating of the party is high enough to support a candidate, than parallel positioning is widely used.
2. The amount of campaign materials in mass media has considerably risen during the last few months. Such materials are often presented without proper marking. This phenomenon is observed in all types of media, particularly of state and municipal ownership. Most loyal or positive publications are about the politicians in power. The number of speeches and interviews of officials explaining the social initiatives of the President has also increased in local media. In some regions, local TV channels launched special TV projects. Distribution of materials with black PR happens rarely.
3. Potential majoritarian candidates are actively engaged in a charity's campaigning, providing financial assistance to voters. This form of hidden campaigning is aimed at both the socially important objects and directly at citizens through the financial support of budgetary organizations, providing equipment to different institutions, distribution of food sets or medical kits, providing financial assistance and cash grants. The campaign charity is conducted on behalf of certain politicians, and through specially created community organizations or charitable funds. A charity provided at the expense of state budget is pretty common. For example, officials are buying equipment for educational or medical institutions, but it's highlighted as their personal contribution. There are examples when items repaired at the budget expense are marked name plates or a logo of a party. Issue of acts on land units with officials’ participation, which was widely used during the last presidential campaign in 2010, is being renewed.
4. Among other forms of campaigning parties and politicians use traditional information tents distributing party literature, arrange bogus polls, and organize entertainment events.

Examples of campaign activities

1. Billboards and city lights are mainly used by the Party of Regions and Ukraine – Forward! The former usually congratulates the electorate on national and Church holidays. Heads of local governments help them, by using symbols of the Party of Regions on own billboards, although such production is often called "social advertising". Natalia Korolevska and her political project Ukraine – Forward! is leading in the amount of outdoor advertising. Other political forces use outdoor advertising in several target regions. For example, the party Front for Change promotes itself in several regions (Kirovohrad, Poltava), while the Communist Party of Ukraine – in central and eastern regions (Vinnytsia, Dnipropetrovsk, Chernihiv, Cherkasy). The amount of outdoor advertising of Victor Medvedchuk and his public project «Ukrainian Choice» have increased considerably during last month.

2. Future candidates in majoritarian districts are also actively using outdoor advertising. Union Party leader in Simferopol Lev Myrymskyi, First Deputy Mayor of Kryvyi Rih, leader of the local office of the Party of Regions Kostiantyn Pavlov and MP of Ukraine Ihor Rybakov placed billboards with their own photos in Chernihiv oblast.

3. The amount of campaign materials in mass media, which are not marked as political advertising, have considerably increased during the last period. In particular, the hidden advertising of majoritarian candidates can be often noticed in Cherkasy regional newspaper "Vechirni Cherkasy", official newspaper of Donetsk oblast council and oblast state administration "Zhyzn" ("Life"), municipal newspaper of Kriviy Rih "Chervonyi Hirnyk" ("Red Miner").

4. Some TV-programs or columns in newspapers were created in certain regions specially for politicians. For example, the Head of Volyn oblast office of the European Party of Ukraine, a deputy of Lutsk city council Olena Holeva has established and is conducting a TV show "People's Attorney" on the regional state television channel. Tele-Radio Company «Alex» in Zaporizhzhia had launched TV show «Welcome to Complain», where municipal problems are discussed with participation of the First Deputy Chairman of Oblast State Administration Oleksandr Berezhnyi.

5. Some incidents of black PR in mass media were documented in certain regions. For example, the booklets were spread in Chernihiv on behalf of public organization «For Chernihiv» with negative information about local division of the party Democratic Alliance. Publications against the local politicians have appeared in Kherson: the Head of Antonivka village, a leader of Kherson office of UDAR party (newspaper "Khersonskiy Visnyk"), MP from BYT Yurii Odarchenko (newspaper "Horozhanyn ta Horozhanka"), Kherson Mayor Volodymyr Saldo (newspapers "Hryvna", "V hory").

6. Several politicians created own charity funds and social organizations which helps people in different ways specially for campaign purposes. For example, the Charitable Foundation of Igor Palytsia “New Lutsk” is made for the assistance in education, sports and environmental protection. The charitable foundation of the MP of Ukraine Ihor Shkyri concentrates its activities in Horlivka, Dzerzhynsk, Debaltsevo cities (Donetsk oblast), where assisted computerization of educational institutions and veteran organizations etc. The other MP Denys Omelianovychtogether with the charitable foundation of Borys Kolesnikov provided modern ambulance cars for emergency station in Konstiantynivka.

The MP of Ukraine Bohdan Hubskyi launched big social campaigns in Cherkasy oblast, in particular: Spirituality in Higher Education Project, organizing concerts of local artists and artists from the capital.

There are loads of other examples of such charity, different charitable foundations were created before the elections all over Ukraine, in particular: Charitable Foundation "Blahovist" in Khmelnytsk oblast (by Ivan Hladuniak), in Lviv oblast - "In word and in deed" (by brothers Dubnevych) and "Good Heart" (by Oleh Kanivets), in Rivne oblast - Victor Matchuk foundation, "Love Ukraine" (by Danylo Korylkevych), "Our Region" (by Vasyl Yanitskyi), in Ternopil oblast - "Halychyna - Volyn" (by Viktor Klymenko), «Ukraine – Sacred Family» (by Ivan Matieshyn), in Ivano-Frankivsk oblast - Viacheslav Kredisov Charitable Foundation, in Poltava oblast - "My Poltava" (by Volodymyr Pelypenko), "Oure Home - Poltava" (by Oleksandr Mamai), in Chernihiv oblast - "United world" (by Eduard Prutnik), Mykola Rudkovskiy Charitable Foundation, "Europe" (by Valerii Dubilia), in Vinnytsia oblast - "Reconciliation" (by Volodymyr Prodyvus), in Cherkasy oblast - "Children’s World" (by Valentyna Zhukovska).

8. Sometimes politicians, in particular government officials, use state resources and programs for their own campaign. In particular, a nameplate with names of the Chairman of State oblast Administration Oleksandr Vilkul and his deputy Ivan Stupak has appeared near recently opened playground in Dnipropetrovsk. In Kyiv region (Vyshgorod and Obuhiv rayons) local officials started to grant certificates for land ownership. In Nothern districts of Volyn oblast, the officials stressed on personal assistance of MPs Adam Martyniuk and Hryhorii Smitiukh,who are planning to run in these districts, in building or repairing of new state premises by the cost of state budget.

9. Such charitu conducted by politicians is sometimes used for the collection of information for future election fraud. Particularly, in Alchevsk city (Luhansk oblast) the office of charity fund of Sergiy Shahov (influential regional entrepreneur, deputy of Luhansk oblast council) was established. Representatives of this fund called pensioners in cities of Alchevsk and Brianka, and other adjacent settlements and proposed maintenance grants of 50 hrn in exchange for their personal passport information. Pensioners were campaigned to vote for S. Shahov on future elections.

10. Among other methods of campaign the most notorious are:

• pseudo-surveys («Ukrainian Youth Information Agency» performed a «an opinion poll» and during the survey, in parallel, campaigned for new political leader Natalia Korolevska);
• cleaning settlements (UDAR party performed cleaning of the territory and planting trees in Ivano-Frankivsk city and Tlumatsk rayon);
• meetings with voters (meetings of city Mayor Gennadiy Kernes with retired and veterans were conducted in 8 districts of Kharkiv, with participation of future candidates in majoritarian districts.);
• awarding prizes and scholarships (Council of Opposition Forces of Cherkasy oblast established an Award for journalists for non-biased coverage of events in 3 nominations – for non-biased coverage of authorities, for coverage of small and medium business and creative contest);
• using non-standard methods (MP Oleg Lyashko visited Cherkasy Polytechnic College hostel where cooked potato with students during his visit to Cherkasy oblast).