English Version of This Report Is the Only Official Document
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights UKRAINE PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 28 OCTOBER 2012 OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report Warsaw 3 January 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................... 1 II. INTRODUCTION AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...................................................................................... 3 III. BACKGROUND AND POLITICAL CONTEXT .......................................................................................... 4 IV. THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND ELECTORAL SYSTEM...................................................................... 5 V. THE ELECTION ADMINISTRATION......................................................................................................... 8 A. THE CECENTRAL LECTION OMMISSION ..........................................................................................................................8 B. DISTRICT ELECTION COMMISSIONS.................................................................................................................................9 C. PRECINCT ELECTION COMMISSIONS.............................................................................................................................10 VI. VOTER REGISTRATION ............................................................................................................................11 VII. CANDIDATE REGISTRATION ..................................................................................................................13 VIII. TPHE CAM AIGN ENVIRONMENT AND FINANCE...............................................................................15 A. THE CAMPAIGN ENVIRONMENT....................................................................................................................................15 B. CAMPAIG N FINANCE........................................................................................................................................................18 IX. THE MEDIA ........... ........................................................................................................................................19 A. LEGAL FRAMEWORK ............... .... ..................... ...............................................................................................................19 B. MEDIA ENVIRONMENT ...................................................................................................................................................20 C. OSCE/ODIHR EOM MEDIA MONITORING ...............................................................................................................21 X. PARTICIPATION OF NATIONAL MINORITIES ...................................................................................22 XI. CITIZEN AND INTERNATIONAL OBSERVERS ....................................................................................23 XII. CPOM LAINTS ADN APPEALS .......... ............ ............................................................................................24 A. OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................................................................24 B. PRE‐ELECTION DCAY OMPLAINTS AND APPEALS......................................................................................................25 XIII. ELECTION DAY ............................................................................................................................................27 A. VOTING ..............................................................................................................................................................................27 B. COUNTING.........................................................................................................................................................................28 XIV. POSTELECTION DAY DEVELOPMENTS..............................................................................................29 A. TABULATION AND ANNOUNCEMENT OF RESULTS.....................................................................................................29 B. POST‐ELECTION COMPLAINTS AND APPEALS.............................................................................................................32 XV. RMECOM ENDATIONS................................................................................................................................33 A. PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS.....................................................................................................................................33 B. OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................................................................................................................35 ANNEX: ELECTION RESULTS.................................................................................................................................38 ABOUT THE OSCE/ODIHR......................................................................................................................................39 UKRAINE PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 28 October 2012 OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report1 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Following an invitation from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR) on 12 September 2012 deployed an Election Observation Mission (EOM) for the 28 October 2012 parliamentary elections. The OSCE/ODIHR EOM assessed compliance of the election process with OSCE commitments and other international standards for democratic elections, as well as with national legislation. For election day, the OSCE/ODIHR EOM joined forces with delegations of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly (OSCE PA), the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), the European Parliament (EP), and the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (NATO PA). The Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions issued by the OSCE/ODIHR, the OSCE PA, PACE, the NATO PA and the EP on 29 October 2012 concluded that while voters had a choice between distinct parties and election day was calm and peaceful overall, certain aspects of the pre- election period constituted a step backwards compared with recent national elections. In particular, these elections were characterized by the lack of a level playing field, caused primarily by the abuse of administrative resources, lack of transparency of campaign and party financing, and the lack of balanced media coverage. While the voting and counting processes on election day were assessed positively overall, the tabulation of results was negatively assessed in nearly half of the electoral districts observed. Post election day, the integrity of the results in some districts appeared to be compromised by instances of manipulation of the results and other irregularities, which were not remedied by the Central Election Commission (CEC) or the courts. The elections were held under a new electoral law adopted in November 2011, which could provide a sound foundation for the conduct of democratic elections, if implemented properly. The new electoral law contains a number of improvements, but more are required in order to fully comply with OSCE and other international commitments. In particular, improvements could be considered with regard to the full enjoyment of candidacy rights, adequate campaign finance provisions, clear criteria for the delineation of single-mandate electoral districts, and more effective sanctions for serious violations of the law. Implementation of the electoral law was not always consistent and in line with international standards. Many of the shortcomings observed in these elections were due to the reinstated mixed electoral system, which reintroduced deficiencies noted when it was previously used. The election administration, headed by the CEC, managed the technical aspects of the elections adequately before election day, although the CEC did not always take steps to ensure consistent implementation of the electoral law. The transparency of the CEC’s activities was diminished by the fact that it routinely held pre-session meetings behind closed doors and that most of its open sessions lacked substantive discussion. Most positions on District and Precinct Election Commissions (DECs and PECs) were filled by 1 The English version of this report is the only official document. An unofficial translation is available in Ukrainian. Ukraine Page: 2 Parliamentary Elections, 28 October 2012 OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report lottery. As a result, some parties with very few candidates obtained representation on all DECs, while parties with a high number of candidates throughout the country remained unrepresented. There were claims, some verified by the OSCE/ODIHR EOM, that election commissioners nominated by some small parties were in fact affiliated with other parties, especially the ruling Party of Regions. The high rate of replacements of DEC and PEC members, mainly at the request of the nominating parties, adversely affected the work of DECs and PECs, especially as previously trained election commissioners were substituted by untrained ones. The centralized voter registration system functioned well overall, and stakeholders did not raise serious concerns with regards to voter registration. However, the very high number of late applications for homebound voting in some