“Brutal Violations of Human Rights and the Election Law” in Ukraine :: Charter'97 :: News

The Ukrainian affiliate of the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights (IHF), the Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union, which has monitored the entire course of the presidential election campaign, has issued a summary its conclusions.

The Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union

STATEMENT

The Ukrainian Helsinki Human Rights Union performed continuous monitoring of adherence to human rights during the 2004 election campaign, working in collaboration with partnership organizations. We registered the most brutal violations of human rights and the election law, both in range and consequences. The election took place in an atmosphere of pressure applied on voters with mass infringements of the election law. The election cannot be considered free, fair or transparent.

On November 21, 2004, the day of the second round of the Presidential run-off election in Ukraine, significant violations of election rights of citizens occurred.

1. Hindering citizens to freely express their will

Abuse of power and hindering citizens to freely express their will through absentee ballots multiplied into mass occurrences during the second round of the Presidential run-off election in Ukraine. State authorities and the management of state-run enterprises in Ukraine’s western regions forced their employees to obtain absentee ballots, which were issued to citizens in the event of their absence from their permanent registered location on Election Day, and submit them to their superiors. These facts were also identified judicially. Thus, employees of the Mykolaiv inter-district State Tax Administration of the Lviv region appealed to the local court complaining of their supervisor’s actions. These actions of the STA were ruled illegal. Hundreds of similar complaints were lodged with polling station commissions, law-enforcement bodies, presidential candidates’ election headquarters and mass media. The majority of these complaints were denied an appropriate legal evaluation, and the individuals at fault were not held accountable.

Facts of the same individuals taking part in absentee voting were recorded at various polling stations in numerous regions throughout Ukraine, and particularly in the Kherson and Sumy regions, and in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea.
For example, Anatoliy Andriyovych Shaidur, a resident of Crimea, obtained several absentee ballots at Polling Station Commission # 60, polling Precinct #10. He used certificate # 057417 to vote at Polling Station # 66, and certificate # 057402 to vote at Polling Station # 67. He was also included on the list of voters at his residency location and voted at Polling Station # 63.

In Severodonetsk, a group of students was identified as having voted using their absentee ballots at Polling Station # 113/33 and then repeating the action at Polling Station 113/30. A complaint reporting this fact was submitted to the Territorial Election Commission (TEC), which failed to review it, and the complaint was baselessly left without review - the commission voted against including it on its daily agenda. A submitted complaint regarding the recognition of the legitimacy of valid votes met with the same fate.

This kind of voting was prevalent on a massive scale in the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine, and led to a significant increase in voter turnout.

2. Pressure applied on voters to take part in voting.

Monitoring organizations for the protection of human rights continuously received information regarding state bodies “delivering the plan” to the Polling Stations for ensuring at least a 90% voter turnout, and how the Polling Stations “ensured” such turnout by brutal violations of the law. During the election, facts were established that members of commissions and other individuals were given voter lists, which is illegal, at Polling Stations in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, and in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, and telephoned the voters who had appeared at Polling Stations to convince them to come to the stations. Such actions by Polling Stations took place on a massive scale; and constitute an abuse of the authority given to the PSC by Article 27 of the “Law on the Election of the President of Ukraine”, and directly violate the requirements of Article 5 of this Law, which prohibits compelling voters to vote. Also, representatives of state bodies, enterprises and institutions remained at or near stations to record the attendance of their employees.

Not only voters who could not appear at Polling Stations for health reasons, but other individuals as well were included on voter lists for voting at their registered locations in the Luhansk, Mykolaiv, and Donetsk regions, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, and the City of Sevastopol.

The Polling Station Commissions acted in this manner, having been obligated to do so by representatives of state bodies in order to increase voter turnout.

We insist that all of these noted facts of applying violations against individuals participating in the election process must be immediately addressed by law-enforcement authorities, and the individuals to blame, brought to criminal responsibility. Also, those individuals who hindered citizens to freely demonstrate their will must be held responsible according to the law.

We re bound to state that the state bodies of Ukraine were actively involved in the election process in various illegal ways, creating impediments for representatives of the political opposition to conduct their election campaign, and provided support to the incumbent Prime Minister in defiance of the law. In particular, local state administrations indeed conducted a significant range of activities in favour of incumbent Prime Minister V. Yanukovych.

The results of observation in the Luhansk region and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea attest an exceedingly large number of violations of the election law, which significantly affected the results of the voting.

Ukraine’s law-enforcement authorities failed to secure the safety of the voters, which is proven by the facts of acts of violence against voters and observers in the Sumy, Cherkasy and Luhansk regions. Numerous reports on the persecution of individuals involved in activities in favour of the political opposition during the election in the Luhansk and Donetsk regions are particularly of concern.