Statement of OPORA Civic Network on the situation in district No. 205 and major challenges for the election process
On the eve of the next local elections in Ukraine, the intermediate elections of the People’s Deputy of Ukraine in the single -mandate constituency No. 205 (Chernihiv) are important for the state to ensure the implementation of international and national standards of election campaigns, to prevent and ensure a proper legal response to violation of legislation. After the extraordinary elections of the People’s Deputies of Ukraine in 2014, during which progress was recorded in the provision of election standards, the intermediate elections of the People’s Deputy in Chernihiv will demonstrate the level of readiness of state authorities and leading political forces to guarantee the sustainability of positive trends in the election process in Ukraine.
The intermediate elections of the People’s Deputy of Ukraine in the single -mandate constituency # 205 are characterized by an unprecedented number of candidates. The constituency voters will have the opportunity to elect 91 candidates for People’s Deputies of Ukraine, of which 7 were nominated by political parties, and other candidates have exercised the right of self -nomination.
With a large number of candidates, about 17 participated in the campaign campaign with different levels of intensity interacted with voters, conducted mass events and deployed agitation networks. The ratio of the number of active candidates and candidates who are not involved in the election campaign, certifies the relevance of the problem of the so-called “technical candidates” in the election process.
The factor of “Technical candidates not only distorts the principle of balance of interest in precinct election commissions, which includes formally their representatives, but also creates additional risks to the election. In the face of excessive conflict of the electoral process, there are opportunities for non -public use of “technical” candidates, in order to destabilize the situation, provoke exacerbations during the counting of votes and establishing the results of voting in the interests of the third party. At the same time, the involvement of the most active candidates in destabilizing steps of inactive election participants will not be formally proven and will not become a widely known society. The fact that the composition of the DEC No. 205 is attended by a large number of persons who participated in the organization of elections in the respective positions in the conflict districts of Kyiv, Cherkasy region and other separate regions, in particular in the regular elections of the People’s Deputies of Ukraine in 2012, re -elections as well as some other resonant campaigns.
The election campaign in the constituency developed in an atmosphere of exacerbation of political confrontation of leading parliamentary and non -parliamentary political parties, and in the unacceptable election standards of election of the level of conflict between candidates.
During the election process, a number of force and provocative incidents were recorded (in particular, on 16-17.07.2015, representatives of candidate Gennady Korban were blocked by a car in which they were unknown. As a result of official investigative actions Candidate of Sergey Berezenko was also refuted by the representatives of the latter. Some people’s deputies of Ukraine also participated in the force incidents, in particular, it is about public beating by the People’s Deputies of Ukraine Andriy Lozov and Igor Mosiychuk, Alexei Durnev’s candidate.
Events with manifestations of force confrontation and provocations discredit the electoral process not only in the eyes of voters, but also of the international community, which during the previous elections paid special attention to the need for careful investigation and proper response to cases of violence and threats during elections. In particular, in the final report of the OSCE/BDIPP observation mission, it was stated that the competitive election campaign at the extraordinary elections of the People’s Deputies of Ukraine in 2014 was overshadowed by cases of violence. At the same time, the OSCE/BDIR mission’s recommendations included the need to promptly investigate all cases of violence and intimidate the election process participants in an independent and impartial way, as well as to hold the perpetrators liable, as provided by law. The Ukrainian state was also recommended to strengthen efforts to ensure opportunities to access all candidates to the electorate on an equal basis and without fear of violence or punishment[1].
Thus, the exacerbation of force confrontation, especially during the vote and counting of votes, can call into question the internal and international levels of state bodies to ensure the stability and legality of the electoral process and to take into account the previous shortcomings in guaranteeing law and order during the election.
Opora congratulates the decision of the Minister of Internal Affairs Arsen Avakov to send to the constituency # 205 to the investigator-operative group and additional units of law enforcement forces to ensure the legality of the electoral process, which was a message on 19.07.2015.
The candidates who most actively conducted a pre -election campaign have built agitation strategies on a nationwide political context, topical aspects of confrontation between the leading political forces. This circumstance exacerbated the conflict of the election campaign in the constituency and made it impossible to correctly interact between candidates.
Instead, the use of the activity of the Regional Development Council under the President of Ukraine for the agitation purposes of the candidate from the Petro Poroshenko Bloc Party, Serhiy Berezenko, creates a public effect of involvement of the country’s higher official in the local electoral process, which does not contribute to the trust of voters in the activities of state authorities, law enforcement agencies.
In the single -mandate constituency, the largest active candidates use the technologies with signs of voter bribery and abuse of administrative resources. In particular, in the district during the election process, the mass activity of the UKROP Charitable Foundation was launched, the symbolism of which coincides completely with the symbols of the Political Party “UKROP”, which is the nominee of Candidate Gennady Korban. The activities of the relevant fund were covered by a large number of voters receiving product kits. At the beginning of the election process, the candidate denied direct involvement in the charitable foundation, but later stopped refuting the relevant fact. The founder of the UKROP and the UKROP political party is the same person who prove the official registers of legal entities.
At the same time, representatives of the candidate from the Petro Poroshenko Bloc Party Sergey Berezenko conclude “social agreements” between the candidate and the residents of Chernihiv, who provide for the provision of recent agitation services. Considering the statements of individual candidates on the presence of facts of money under these agreements and the experience of using similar technologies in the previous elections, law enforcement agencies should ensure a proper investigation of messages and statements on these manifestations of the agitation campaign. Candidates also implement infrastructure projects (repairs of roads, entrances of apartment buildings and other objects), which has signs of bribery of voters in accordance with the current version of Article 160 of the Criminal Code
The Law of Ukraine “On Elections of People’s Deputies of Ukraine” does not provide for the cancellation of the candidate for the day of voting, including even provided that in court the fact of bribery of voters and other violations of the law is proved. Thus, the internal affairs bodies should conduct an objective investigation into these manifestations of agitation already within the limits of criminal proceedings, and candidates to assist law enforcement agencies in this. Objective investigation should be based on the principle of inevitability of punishment for crimes against citizens’ suffrage. Also, all stakeholders should take into account that the use of voter bribery technologies in Ukraine caused not only amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine on the separation of voters’ bribery into a separate crime in 2014, but also received a negative assessment by authoritative international organizations.
Sergey Berezenko (Petro Poroshenko Bloc “Solidarity”) and Gennady Korban (Political Party “Ukrainian Patriots Association-UKROP”) remain two most active majority candidates. Charity and less hidden forms of influence on voters. The candidate’s election headquarters Sergey Berezenko uses the so -called “social agreements” to obtain voter mobilization.
Parliamentary political parties and existing MPs actively intervene in the course of the electoral process and publicly support candidates – subjects of the election process: on the one hand condemning the manifestations of abuse and unlawful behavior by candidates by candidates, on the other hand – without recognizing and avoiding political responsibility for their candidates.
Also, individual officials of public authorities and local self -government do not adhere to the principle of neutrality and, using their official position, resort to hidden forms of agitation or anti -aggression in the interests of individual candidates.
The process of formation of district election commissions in the constituency No. 205 was accompanied by numerous public conflicts and confrontation between the subjects of the electoral process with the participation of law enforcement agencies and the general public. Conflicts and confrontation, which periodically take place in the work of the district election commission, call into question its ability to ensure the proper and impartial administration of the election process on the day of voting and especially at the stage of vote counting and the establishment of results. The maximum openness of the work of DECs and the creation of opportunities for independent public control over its activities (exclusively within the framework of the law) on the day of voting will partially neutralize these threats.
The progress in the implementation of democratic electoral standards that has been achieved during the latest election campaigns (including the 2014 presidential election) can be destroyed by the purposeful efforts of the election process and in the conditions of inaction and non -interference of the parties to guarantee the law and democratic process in Ukraine.