DECLARATION - The New York Times



DECLARATION

OF THE INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS FROM

THE COMMONWEALTH OF INDEPENDENT STATES

ON THE RESULTS OF THEIR MONITORING OF THE PREPARATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE RE-VOTE IN THE ELECTIONS FOR

THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE

21 November 2004

International observers from the Commonwealth of Independent States continued their work after the 31 October 2004 and took part in monitoring of the preparation and implementation of the re-vote in the elections for the President of Ukraine.

I. Organization of the monitoring and conditions of its implementation

were characterized by the fact that the observers from the CIS were provided with the organizational and technical means and the legal guarantees necessary for conducting international monitoring of the elections. As in the first stage, great practical help was provided by the Cross-Departmental Working Group for Assisting the Activities of Official Observers from Foreign States.

In our work we followed the electoral legislation of Ukraine, the articles of the Convention on the Standards of Democratic Elections, the electoral rights and freedoms of the member-states of the CIS, the Copenhagen document of the OSCE, and other directions that relate to the monitoring of presidential and parliamentary elections in the nations of the CIS. The mission of the monitors from the Commonwealth, as defined by the designated documents of the CUS, observed the principles of neutrality, impartiality, non-interference in the electoral process and refusal to take into account any preferences or considerations in relation to either candidate for the post of President.

In the course of monitoring we paid particular attention to the gathering and analysis of factual material. The observers from the CIS had at their disposal information made available by the Central Election Committee of Ukraine and all electoral commissions of all levels. During the monitoring procedure there was constructive cooperation with other international observers and, in particular, with the Bureau for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the OSCE. We also maintained regular contact and a continuous exchange of information with national monitors.

The representatives of the monitoring Mission of the CIS met with the leaders of the central and many regional electoral staffs of both candidates for President. In the course of these meetings we ascertained more precisely the structures and organization of the work of campaign staffs at different levels, their financial backers, and the gathering and use of campaign material.

We also had the opportunity to meet with the leaders of provincial and municipal state administrations, with representatives of the Supreme Court and the Chief Procurator’s office, of the Ministries of Justice and Internal Affairs, and with mass media organizations.

At the preparation stage and on the day of re-voting in the presidential elections, monitoring was carried out in all 225 electoral districts, by international observers from the CIS, from the Cross-Parliamentary Assembly and the central election commissions of the CIS, and also from the Parliamentary Union of Belarus and Russia, and the Executive Committee of the Commonwealth. As in the earlier stages of the elections for the President of Ukraine, their activities were coordinated by the staffs of the Mission in Kiev and its outposts in Dnepropetrovsk, L’vov, Simferopol and Khar’kov.

We had unimpeded access to electoral districts and meetings with voters, studied the enforcement procedures of the Central Election Commission and the organizational work of the territorial and district commissions, and received from them information on the course of the electoral process.

All this allowed us to conduct objective preliminary appraisals of the course of the electoral process and the re-vote.

II. The pre-election situation and organization of the re-vote

in the elections for the President of Ukraine were distinguished by a noticeably increased interest in them from the international community. This is illustrated by the fact that the number of accredited foreign observers grew to 4,788, which includes 649 from the Commonwealth of Independent States.

The electoral commissions on all levels and the organs of state power and governance of Ukraine strove to provide the conditions for a re-vote that were in keeping with international standards and national electoral legislation. The organizers of the elections in part took into account the shortcomings observed in the elections of 31 October 2004 and logged by us in the previous Declaration on the results of our monitoring of the presidential elections.

As a positive instance we would like to note the work of the Central Election Commission in clarifying the form of application of various articles from the Law ‘On Elections for the President of Ukraine’ at the organization stage. Specific practical work was carried out to clarify and renew the electoral registers for the re-vote, which were drawn up with better quality. On the day of the re-vote the district electoral commissions were permitted to make changes to the electoral register when written declarations were provided or passports presented that exposed technical inaccuracies in it.

The Mission of observers from the CIS noted the constructive position of President L. D. Kuchma, thanks to which the Law ‘On the particularities of the application of the Law “On Elections of the President of Ukraine” for the re-vote on 21 November 2004’, taken up by the Verkhovna Rada [Parliament] on 18 November 2004, did not come into power. This legislative act prohibited voting by proxy or absentee ballot, even for citizens who for health reasons or other respectable reasons could not personally attend a voting station. Its implementation would have prevented hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian citizens from exerting their constitutional right to take part in presidential elections, and would have called into question its respect for the principles of general electoral rights.

We state that in the leadership of the electoral commissions there were effectively equal numbers of representatives of both candidates for President, which is an important condition of objective vote counting. According to data from the Central Electoral Commission, across the territorial commissions there were 448 representatives of V. A. Yushchenko and 424 representatives of V. F. Yanukovich.

III. Informational support and pre-election campaigning

in the second round of the presidential elections, in the opinion of the Mission of observers of the CIS, were characterized by a more balanced approach to illuminating the course of the campaigns of both candidates in the mass media.

In our view, a positive influence on the improvement of the pre-election situation in the country before the second vote was brought about by the open television debates for the two pretenders, which were carried out in the correct way. The fact that television debates took place is one of the most important indications of a democratic electoral process.

At the same time we believe that some media organizations allowed instances of biased reporting on the electoral campaign.

In the final rallies before the re-vote tense situations often arose, there were unduly emotional statements made, and unrestrained declarations with calls for illicit action.

The observers from the Commonwealth did not record a single stated indication from candidate V. A. Yushchenko or the members of his staff about their readiness to accept the victory of his competitor. On the contrary, the whole electoral campaign of V. A. Yushchenko was founded on a strategy of not accepting the results of the elections in the event of his defeat.

In comparison to the first round of voting, the quantity of anonymous printed material which bore injurious statements about the candidates significantly increased. The analysis of campaign material carried out by the Mission from the CIS showed that incorrect methods were used by the staffs of both candidates for the post of President. At the same time, both in terms of the quantity and the ploy of submitting biased information, material published by the supporters of candidate V. A. Yushchenko significantly prevailed.

IV. Consideration of the complaints about the electoral process

was constantly undertaken in the course of the monitoring. The Mission from the CIS notes that the Law ‘On the Elections of the President of Ukraine’ sufficiently precisely defines the process for appealing the actions of subjects in the electoral process.

In the course of the preparation and implementation of the electoral process the Central Electoral Commission received 1094 complaints, including: 692 from the candidates for President and their representatives; 95 from members of the electoral commissions; 47 from the political parties; 231 from citizens; 29 from other subjects. On the day of the re-vote the Central Election Commission of Ukraine considered 1067 complaints.

Local judges considered 46,500 declarations, submitted on 31 October 2004, in relation to the electoral registers.

In connection with requests filed by the leadership of the Mission from the CIS to the organs of internal affairs and the procurators of Ukraine, 92 criminal proceedings were brought by the Ministry of internal affairs in relation to the electoral process. For incidents of violations of the electoral legislation 14 criminal proceedings have been launched by the procurators and are being investigated.

V. Monitoring of the re-vote and its counting

was conducted by observers from the Mission of the CIS in 4,632 electoral districts, including four abroad. They visited a significant number of territorial electoral commissions in all provinces of Ukraine, in the Autonomous Republic of the Crimea and in the city of Kiev. We were able to observe the process of the opening of voting districts, the voting of citizens, the closing of districts, the counting of votes and the form of the protocols in district electoral commissions as regards the results of the voting.

We state that the re-vote which took place on 21 November 2004 in the elections for the President of Ukraine overall proceeded in an organized way, with high participation of the electorate, in keeping with the demands of the national electoral legislation. We note the more concerted efforts of members of the district electoral commissions towards punctual conducting of sittings before the start of the vote in which the electoral procedures specified in the law for the preparation of the re-vote were realized, and towards punctual opening of the electoral districts.

For citizens who were unable on grounds of health to come to the voting stations, voting was organized in homes and hospitals. This voting took place in the presence of monitors.

We recorded shortcomings and infringements during this second round of voting. In a number of electoral districts inaccuracies in the electoral register were not amended, some voting stations did not comply with the demands of the electoral legislation, there were complaints from some voters that they had been pressurized, there were instances of bribery and intimidation.

On the day of voting some individual districts (in Kiev, L’vov and Odessa) did not open on time. Electoral district no. 102 of electoral region no. 100 (the city of Kirovograd) due to the non-appearance of the chairman and eleven members of the district commission opened only at 4pm. In a number of places the ballot-boxes were sealed in violation of the demands laid out in the law. In some regions (Kiev, L’vov) the observers from the CIS recorded campaign material in support of candidate V. A. Yushchenko, as well as open campaigning for him in immediate proximity of voting stations.

In separate districts groups of young people in the guise of journalists, without the appropriate documents, put pressure on members of the electoral commissions, interfered with their activities (Dnepropedrovsk and Odessa provinces). On leaving electoral district no. 33 of electoral region no. 167 (the city of Zbarash in the Ternopolsky province) a monitor from the CIS was threatened by a group of young people with physical violence.

Just as on 31 October 2004, the observers from the CIS recorded incidents of the use of so-called ‘exit-polls’. We believe that such surveys do not have any legal base, are untrustworthy and instead of an objective informing on the course of voting turn into an instrument of influence on the public consciousness in the interests of one or the other candidate. Their results, therefore, cannot be taken into consideration.

The infringements and violations which took place in the re-vote in the presidential elections in Ukraine, and which were overlooked by the electoral commissions, were not of a mass nature. Individual instances were rectified immediately in the course of monitoring, and in general, in our opinion, they did not have a significant impact on the freedoms and rights of citizens.

VI. Preliminary assessments

of the presidential elections in Ukraine were completed by us on the basis both of official documents and our own monitoring, and factual material we gathered in the course of monitoring.

In their previous Declaration the observers from the CIS appraised the electoral legislation in Ukraine as, overall, positive. We note once more that the Law ‘On Elections for the President of Ukraine’ is, in our view, one of the more democratic acts amongst the electoral legislations of all the countries of the Commonwealth. It provides an essential legal base for the conduct of free and democratic elections. That said, its individual articles need some further improvement. We uphold our recommendations and suggestions as logged in the Declaration of the monitors of the CIS on the results of the previous vote in the presidential elections in Ukraine.

The observers from the CIS note that these last elections became a national campaign with active participation from various political forces and parties, which competed with each other and campaigned for their candidates in the conditions of freedom and equality upheld by the law.

The elections demonstrated that the citizens of Ukraine both had the opportunity and used the opportunity to have free, secret declarations of their will on the basis of common, equal electoral rights.

The Mission of international observers from the Commonwealth of Independent States believes that the re-vote in the presidential elections in Ukraine of 21 November 2004 was carried out by the electoral commissions in accordance with the electoral legislation of Ukraine, and judge them to be transparent, legitimate and free.

We call for the reports of other international monitors, which share the judgments and conclusions drawn here, to be attached to our Declaration.

These are genuine conclusions and evaluations prepared before the final announcement of the results of the elections. A detailed account of the work of the Mission of observers from the CIS in the presidential elections in Ukraine will be presented to the heads of the member-states of the Commonwealth by the Leader of the Mission in accordance with the rules of procedure adopted by the Commonwealth of Independent States.

[Translated by Alexander Nurnberg for The New York Times, December 2005]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download