Report of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine On results of the monitoring of preparation to the start of the local election campaign in Ukraine 2010

Committee of Voters of Ukraine

P. B. 56, Kyiv – 2 tel. / fax: +38 (044) ; 425 37 20

E - mail: *****@***

http:\\www. cvu.

10.09.2010

Report of the Committee of Voters of Ukraine On results of the monitoring of preparation to the start of the local election campaign in Ukraine 2010

The Committee of Voters of Ukraine (CVU) is the all-Ukrainian NGO that has been performing comprehensive monitoring of election campaigns in Ukraine in terms of observance of the national legislation and international standards of fair and democratic election by all stakeholders for 15 years. In the represent report, CVU gives an analysis of the legislation on local elections, readiness of political parties to the election and formation of election commissions.

The Law on Local Elections

The Law of Ukraine On Elections of Deputies of the Supreme Council of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, Local Councils and Heads of Village, Settlement, Town Councils adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, fails to confirm with international standards and traditions of the election processes in Ukraine. Amendments to the Law on Local Elections dd. August 30 eliminated some controversies, but did not solve the number of serious drawbacks:

- The mixed proportional – single-member electoral system restricted impact of local leaders and local pressure groups on the local campaign developments. The requirement of party affiliation in the local election is an undemocratic practice, because activities of local governments in towns and districts do not have a political connotation. The dominance of political parties excluded significant social and professional groups from the election process, which would adversely affect work of local authorities.

- The Law establishes unequal conditions for subjects of the election process in matters dealing with formation of election commissions. The Law destroys the principle of proportional representation of candidates and political parties at election commissions, allows biased selection of commissioners and distribution of leading positions among them, violates principles of collegiality in making decisions by election commissions.

- The Law gives excessive powers to the Central Election Commission in relation to territorial election commissions, which could bring politicization in work of local bodies. Given the experience of previous campaigns, election disputes should be resolved through the mechanisms of justice, instead of CEC regulations.

- The Law establishes the shortest deadline for organization of regular local elections. In view of high workload of the CEC and territorial election commissions, it would hardly improve the quality of preparation to and conduction of elections.

- The Law fails to secure transparency of information on candidates. The Law on Local Elections does not make candidates for deputies of local councils submit their election programs to commissions. It would adversely affect awareness of voters.

- The Law does not utilize full capacities of the State Register of Voters, which opens opportunities for manipulations with voter lists and violations at making amendments to lists. The number of bodies still works with voter lists; at that, principles of inter-agency cooperation have not been defined.

- Closed party lists and lack of self-nomination for local elections made efficient selection of candidates impossible. Utilization of some elements of the primaries, which was not regulated by law, rather pertained to electoral technologies and had nothing in common with selection of real community leaders.

- Leal regulation of NGO participation in monitoring of the election process requires substantial improvement. Public organizations are not entitled to execute statements of infringements and receive copies of the minutes of vote tabulation, which conflicts with the principles of independent observance. In addition, the Law imposes limitations on NGOs by their status, because only national organizations have the right to monitor the election.

Early campaign launched by parties

The majority of political parties started their campaign long before its official launch. After adoption of changes to the Law on Local Elections, which allowed almost all parties to take part in the campaign, the majority launched the full-scale campaigning. On the national level, the most active were the Party of Regions, the Strong Ukraine, the Motherland, the United Center, and the Freedom parties. In some regions UNP, For Ukraine, the Communist Party, the Progressive Socialist Party of Ukraine, the Union, and UDAR parties have stirred up. In some locations, the smaller parties supporting candidates for town mayors and local council deputies held the campaign, i. e. the Free Democrats, the Conscience of Ukraine, the Rodina, the Hometown parties etc.

Campaign mainly takes form of outdoor advertising, hidden advertising in local media, and distribution of false information about competitors. Several parties have launched a network of campaign tents.

At the same time, unofficial launch of the election campaign revealed specific features of participation of different political forces:

The Party of Regions. The Party of Regions looks the best structured and equipped to participate in the election. In addition to outdoor advertising, they held the nationwide and regional meetings of the Party of Regions, which involved resources of state administrations. Also, many nonpartisan mayors entered the Party of Regions during the period under report.

The biggest problem faced by the PR representatives during preparation to the election (especially in eastern and southern regions) is the need to choose a single candidate for the mayor in cities where several PR candidates are competing for the office (e. g. in Odessa, Kharkiv). This process provoked internal conflicts in local PR organizations, which do not become public. Formation of electoral lists of the Party of Regions for local councils is even more troublesome.

The Motherland. The launch of the campaign caused open conflicts and change of leadership in a number of regional organizations. In particular, it happened in Lviv, Kyiv, Kharkiv, and Luhansk regions. As a result, the Party is not ready to take part in local elections in some key regions. Difficult situation in those regional organizations was provoked by both internal conflicts and external factors, like conflicting court decisions and formal limitations imposed by regional offices of justice.

The Strong Ukraine. The main feature of the Stone Ukraine’s campaigning was the so-called people's primaries. This campaign got wide media coverage. However, the majority of experts believe that it was rather electoral technology, not a transparent procedure for lists formation. In addition, the Strong Ukraine failed to nominate their own candidates for mayor of several large cities, where such political entity had the great rating.

Formation of election commissions

Having analyzed provisions of the new Law on Local elections, CVU concludes that TEC would be more biased in their operations. Oblast and district commissions are formed by the CEC from among persons nominated by parties registered in relevant oblasts (districts, cities) party organizations. At that, 15 commissioners are nominated by parties having representations in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (three nominees from each faction). However, today three parliamentary factions represent party blocs, and in total there are 16 parliamentary parties, which can nominate 48 persons for 15 offices. The Law does not provide any mechanism for selection of commissioners from parties that had formed the blocks. CEC includes commissioners at their own discretion, guided only by subjective criteria of “previous experience of work in commissions”.

Therefore, the Party of Regions and the Communist Party will not have problems with appointment of commissioners, while the Bloc of Lytvyn, Yulia Tymoshenko’s Bloc and Out Ukraine – People’s Self-Defense Bloc are to undergo the troublesome coordination of candidates between party offices, which are going to nominate their independent candidates.

Also, the revised wording of the Law does not establish the principle of proportionality in allocation of leadership positions in commissions. Therefore, representatives of one party can take leadership in the majority or even all territorial election commissions.

In general, this principle of TEC formation works in favor of parties having majority in the CEC.

Public oversight of local elections

The new Law allows only all-Ukrainian NGOs to observe the election. However, in order to be registered, such entities should submit among other documents a copy of the charter certified by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine. CVU appealed to the Ministry for a certified copy, but they said that no deadline for that procedure has been established. Therefore, CVU asks the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine to certify copies of charters of NGOs willing to observe the election without delay. Also, CVU encourages the greatest possible number of foreign and international institutions, diplomatic missions in Ukraine to take part in monitoring of the local elections in Ukraine.

At the same time, CVU blames the fact that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine has not sent a formal invitation to the OSCE / ODIHR mission to observe local elections in Ukraine.