Here is one of those forgotten lessons.
At this writing, even before the polls are closed, there is great
uncertainty over how the votes will be counted and tabulated – from the local
polling station to the regional level and finally to the national level. All
the way up the chain, both counting and tabulation must be done with the
greatest transparency to meet democratic standards.
It appears that Ukraine’s Central Election Commission will be falling far short of transparency, which creates opportunities for
vote stealing.
Deputy CEC head Andriy Magera says the CEC website will only publish
online the results of the 225 district election commissions as the law
requires. But Magera told the Kyiv Post that the CEC has no plans to publish
online all the results of the 33,641 polling stations which make up those
aggregated regional vote counts.
The commission should do so.
Since the infamous Nov. 21, 2004, presidential election contest, which
Viktor Yanukovych lost when the Ukrainian Supreme Court confirmed massive fraud
that triggered the peaceful Orange Revolution, Ukraine has been on a winning
streak. The next four elections after the scandalous one were assessed as free,
fair and relatively democratic.
The Dec. 26, 2004, re-run of the fraudulent presidential election
vaulted Viktor Yushchenko to the presidency instead of Yanukovych.
International observers rated it as largely meeting democratic standards. They
similarly gave positive assessments to the 2006 and 2007 parliamentary
elections, as well as the 2010 presidential vote won by Yanukovych over
imprisoned ex-Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko.
But this winning streak is on the line with today’s vote.
One key event to watch play out is how votes are tabulated and
published, so that people from all over Ukraine can see that the count was
transparent and that they can verify the results – all the way up from the
33,641 local polling stations to the 225 district elections commissions and
finally to the Central Election Commission.
But it doesn’t look like the CEC will do this. If the commission’s
website only includes aggregated amounts from the 225 district election
commissions, Ukraine’s election has a big problem.
Why?
Without the ability for everybody to verify the numbers from the 33,641
precinct election commissions, the district numbers could be changed – and
there would be no way to catch it or confirm the official result of a particular
district. Publication of these local protocols after the official results are
certified would be too late.
Tetiana Lukash, secretary of the Central Election Commission, says that
the law only requires the CEC to publish all 225 district election commission
protocols. But the election law, revised since the 2010 presidential election,
does not require publication of protocols from all of the 33,641 polling
stations (precinct election commissions).
But, Lukash said, the CEC could choose to do so.
“It is up to the CEC to decide whether to make public and in what quantity
protocols from the precinct election commission. Such a decision has not been
considered yet. And it [whether to publish those protocols from precinct
election commissions] will depend on the public interest. We might publish
protocols from some precinct election commissions,” Lukash said.
Valeriy Karpuntsov, a representative to the CEC for Vitali Klitschko’s
Ukrainian Democratic Alliance for Reform Party, says that non-publication of
election protocols from the local precinct election commissions “could create
additional room for election fraud.” But Karpuntsov adds that party
representatives and observers at the polling stations might be able to
photograph those protocols once they are filled out and stamped.
Karpuntsov is right.
Look what happened in the tainted Nov. 21, 2004 presidential election
that triggered the Orange Revolution.
Results were allegedly changed all the way up the line, en route from
the local polling station level to the CEC level, to put Yanukovych falsely
ahead of Yushchenko.
That’s why, for maximum transparency, all results should be published
online on the CEC website. Cost or technical obstacles shouldn’t be the
problem.
After all, the government spent Hr 1 billion – some $125 million – to
equip all polling stations with video
cameras. At best, that might deter obvious ballot stuffing. But cameras will
not prevent large-scale fraud in vote counting and tabulation. That’s done
carefully behind closed doors.
The deputy head of the CEC, Andriy Magera, admits as much.
“The cameras will not be able to record improper vote tallying, it’s
technically impossible,” Magera says. “They might be able to record ballot box
stuffing, should any occur, as well as repeat voting by the same person. In my
opinion, the Hr 1 billion, or 100 million euros spent on cameras, was too great
an expense for cameras that by law will only be used once.”
The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe has been
monitoring elections in the 56-member nations, including Ukraine, for
almost two decades now.
The transparency of counting and tabulation of votes has weighed high in
previous assessments and is likely to do so again. An election must be seen as
verifiably honest.
Here’s a sample of the mixed reviews that OSCE’s Office of Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights gave to the tabulation of the 2010 presidential
election.
“In both rounds, the CEC began releasing preliminary
results on its website on election night. As in previous elections, the CEC posted only partial
figures from the PEC [precinct] election commission] result protocols. Figures
on votes received by the candidates and invalid ballots were posted, but the
number of registered voters and unused ballots were not. Although not required
by law, publishing all the PEC protocol figures would allow observers to fully
verify their copies of the protocols and increase transparency and confidence
in the process.”
The Council of Europe Venice Commission’s Code of Good
Practice in Electoral Matters stipulates
that “results must be transmitted to the higher level in an open
manner.”
But if voters and political parties don’t know the
individual precinct election results, how can the aggregate transmission to the
higher district election commission take place “in an open manner.”
To some extent, a nationwide parallel vote tabulation
could help verify the official results, but it will take more than that. A lot of
elements are needed to ensure a fair vote and a fair count. Among them, of
course, are vigilant observers from competing political parties at all the
nation’s precinct stations, district election commissions and at the national
level.
But OSCE/ODIHR’s interim report of Oct. 19 raised some
disturbing questions about the high turnover on election commissions and
whether the ruling Party of Regions is over-represented.
“Some 85 parties and 1,567 majoritarian
candidates have representatives in PECs [precinct election commissions] as a
result of the lotteries carried out by DECs [district election commissions] for
the distribution of PEC [precinct election commission] positions,” OSCE wrote.
“Some interlocutors expressed their lack of
confidence in the election administration, claiming that many small parties
represented in DECs [district election commissions] and PECs [precinct election
commissions] are affiliated with the Party of Regions, which increases the
predominance of the ruling party within the election administration,” the
OSCE/ODIHR report says.
“Moreover, OSCE/ODIHR LTOs [long-term
observers] reported allegations that DEC [district election commissions] and
PEC [precinct election commission] members were being pressured to withdraw
from their positions. The large-scale replacement of PEC [precinct election
commission] members is ongoing, reaching up to 50 percent of the membership of
some PECs [precinct election commissions]. The reasons given for resignations
vary and include the distance of the PEC [precinct election commissions] from
their home, insufficient remuneration, and lack of experience; however, most
replacements are initiated by the nominating political parties. Some PECs
[precinct election commissions] were not fully operational due to a lack of
quorum or the absence of the chairperson due to resignation.”
So there it is: stacked election commissions
and non-transparent counting and tabulation of votes.
The assessment of such a parliamentary
election cannot be good — and it most likely will be harsh.
Kyiv Post
chief editor Brian Bonner can be reached at [email protected].
Kyiv Post editor Katya Gorchinskaya and Kyiv Post staff writers Yuriy Onyshkiv
and Svitlana Tuchynska contributed reporting to this story.
