Friends, as I have promised I am explaining what happened
to the signatures [in favour of my registration in the presidential
election campaign].
What, according to the Central Electoral Commission,
was the main fault [with voters’ signatures] which did not
allow them to register me in the election campaign?
Here comes the decision of the Central Electoral Commission
refusing me the registration: http://cikrf.ru/law/decree_of_cec/2012/01/27/Zp12733.html
This decision was adopted on the basis of a document handed
to me by the Central Electoral Commission and entitled "Final
Protocol of Verification of Signature Sheets in Favour of
Nomination of Grigory Alexeyevich Yavlinsky Candidate on the
Post of President of the Russian Federation” signed at 18:00
on January 24. The document was signed by N.E.Konkin, head
of the Working Group and Secretary of the Central Electoral
Commission; S.A. Danilenko, head of the sub-group and member
of the Central Electoral Commission. (There is no such a document
at the Central Electoral Commission web-site, but there is
an unsigned protocol of January 23).
The document runs as follows:
……
Number of submitted signatures: 2, 086, 050
Number of verified signatures: 600, 000
Number of defective (void) signatures, (share of defective
(void) signatures in the total number of voters’ signatures
chosen for verification) : 153, 938 (25.66%)
Number of valid signatures: 1, 932, 112
….
Grounds (reasons) for acknowledging signatures defective (void):
….
Code 29 – Other violations of procedural formalities in filing
signature sheets, including signatures of voters whose data
were included into signature sheets not in handwriting (electronic
photographs certified by authorized representatives) *: 137,
492
... ". End of quotation.
*The official instruction by the Central Electoral
Commission - Appendix ¹ 8 to the Resolution of the Central
Electoral Commission of the RF “On the Order of Accepting
and Verification of Signature Sheets with Voters Signatures
in Support of a Candidate for the post of President of the
Russian Federation…” ¹ 58/504-6 of 17.10.2011 - this position
(Code 29) is formulated is follows: " Other violations
of procedural formalities in filing signature sheets."
The instruction gives nothing more. The text of the protocol
of verification of signatures specifies on the item the instruction
does not have: “including signatures of the voters whose data
were included into signature sheets not in handwriting (electronic
photographs certified by authorized representatives).” Thus,
this specification was added arbitrarily and for the first
time, i.e. specially for this protocol.
Let us make a simple calculation: the share of detected defective
(void) signatures that were not included into this category
(Code 29) amounted to 16,446 (2.74% of the number of verified
signatures totaling 600,000). The rest was 137,492 (22.91%):
"Other violations of procedural formalities in filing
signature sheets, including signatures of voters whose data
were included into signature sheets not in handwriting (electronic
photographs certified by authorized representatives).” This
means that the main fault found in the signatures by the Central
Electoral Commission lying behind their refusal in my registration
referred NOT TO THE SIGNATURES, BUT TO “OTHER VIOLATIONS OF
PROCEDURAL FORMALITIES IN FILING OF SIGNATURE SHEETS, including
signatures of those voters whose data were included into signature
sheets not in handwriting (electronic photographs certified
by authorized representatives).
Let me explain what is meant here. Collection of signatures
was conducted on the territories of 71 region of the Russian
Federation. Regional YABLOKO branches and party supporters
participated in the campaign, head quarters were created and
different public organisations and structures also helped
us.
The campaign for collection of signatures started [as required
by the Russian law] after registration of an electoral campaign
account in the Central Electoral Commission, i.e. after December
24. The New Year and Christmas holidays considerably worsened
the conditions for collection of signatures, therefore the
needed rates of signing up were met only after January 10.
In addition, the notaries that [in accordance with the Russian
law] had to certify the signatures of all the collectors of
signatures resumed their work only after January 10. The signatures
could not be submitted to the Central Electoral Commission
without being certified by the notaries and were not accepted
by the main head-quarters. The deadline for submitting signatures
to the Central Electoral Commission was January 18 (and January
15 for the head-quarters, respectively).
Thus, the federal headquarters had the task within five
(!) days to provide for transportation of signature
sheets from the regions to Moscow, receive and check-up all
the sheets, as well as provide for their filing, binding in
the printing office, certification of every sheet by authorized
persons and ensure other technical procedures. The turnover
of documents totaled to about 300,000 signature sheets
with over 2.5 million signatures (excluding notary papers).
Also the fact that collection of signatures naturally went
unevenly as of different regions but they had to be dispatched
to the headquarters regularly and often they could not be
transported to Moscow “with just anyone” (and when the regional
collectors tried to take the signatures to Moscow personally,
the campaign in the regions was virtually suspended for two
or three days, which in the given framework was unacceptable)
made the situation even more difficult.
Proceeding from such a situation and taking into consideration
that the Law did not directly of indirectly prohibit submitting
of electronic copies of signatures sheets we adopted
a decision to permit to the main head quarters, when
necessary, to accept electronic copies of signature sheets
from the regions (i.e. scanned copies) via e-mail
and their further print out in the head quarters with further
check up of the signatures and preparation of these copies
for filing. The copies had to be replaced by the originals
as soon as the originals arrived to Moscow from the regions.
If such a replacement was impossible (when signatures came
to the head quarters too late, for example, the signatures
collected in two days prior to submitting them to the Central
Electoral Commission were too late to arrive to Moscow), we
decided to submit them to the Central Electoral Commission
as electronic copies, i.e. prints-out.
In addition the head quarters in the regions often copied
the sheet forms with the help of copiers when they could not
get the forms made by print shop in time.
In short, the signature sheets the Central Electoral Commission
was referring to as photocopies were signature sheets with
real voters’ signatures obtained in view of tough deadlines
and a huge territory of the country via e-mail and then printed
out. The law does not envisage that but it also does no prohibit
that.
Other defects:
On the identical sheets detected in one file and
two (!) signatures by one and the same voter (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOLEj5Y5YB4).
ONE (!) sheet with eight signatures and its copy were found
among 300,000 signatures. Obviously this was due to a replacement
of a printed out and scanned copy by the original in one of
the head quarters as I have written above.
The same reel also demonstrated different signatures by one
and the same person. But people may sign differently. If a
person signs up at a picket where there is no table, it may
be a scribble, but when signing up is made in the office it
will be a normal signature. A voter may also sign up twice
– “meaning good” without meaning any harm. It is impossible
to check up hundreds of thousands of signature sheets for
repeated signatures. During parliamentary election campaign
of 2011 we found five repeated signatures. In this campaign,
according to the Central Electoral Commission, there was only
ONE (!) such case.
About the “five deceased” whose signatures were detected
in the signature sheets (http://kp.ru/online/news/1068053/).
According to statistics, regretfully about 2,000 people out
of the total 2 million who signed up for YABLOKO have already
died for the period of collection of signatures. Thus, if
a region submitted 50,000 signatures, then, according to statistical
data, over 60 people out of those who signed up might be dead
already. (Also at Moscow municipal elections when one
of the candidates from the Solidarnost movement had to collect
about 50 signatures, one of those who signed up also died
during this period. And the Commission acknowledged these
signatures void because of this, despite of the fact that
this person died AFTER he had signed).
* * *
Considering the present situation and our limited resources
we organised a citizenly collection of signatures all over
Russia and even abroad. ALL those who wished could get signature
sheets and after reading the instructions we published in
the Internet begin collection of signatures.
ANY person could collect signatures in support of my registration.
Judging by letters and postings in the Internet, thousands
of people gathered in groups and called people to sign up
for me. Several dozens of organisations announced their support
to me and also participated in collection of signatures. In
the last days before the deadline the Head Quarters received
hundreds of thousands of signatures dispatched by planes,
trains, coaches, post and e-mail. Over 200 people worked in
the Head Quarters 24 hours a day.
It was a CITIZENLY collection of signatures, and it was our
advantage. However, this also made us prone to different provocations.
Thus we were told in the Central Electoral Commission during
verification of signatures that “their people – informers”
had been secretly working in the head quarters of all the
candidates collecting signatures. And it was no surprise.
I wonder only what these people did in our head quarters –
were they only spying or also “acted”?
We have done all we could in such a situation so that you
could have an alternative. The authorities prohibited to register
me at the presidential elections so that there would be no
alternative. The Central Electoral Commission has fulfilled
this order*.
Thank you all.
Life is going on.
**We will certainly appeal against the decision
made by the Central Electoral Commission. However, the authorities
have also adopted a decision on this, “Moscow. January 24.
INTERFAX. Dmitry Peskov, Press Secretary of Russian Prime
Minister, said that it was wrong and absurd to question the
decision by the Central Electoral Commission not to register
Grigory Yavlinsky. "The Central Electoral Commission
is the only fully authorized body that can either register
or not register presidential candidates. If the CEC
decides that the faulty percentage in the gathered signatures
exceeds the statutory limit, it would be absurd to question
this decision.”
See also:
Presidential
Elecitons 2012
State Duma
Elections 2011
|
