| The Federation Council reluctantly passed a
law "On the main guarantees
of electoral rights and the right to participate in referendums
for
citizens of the Russian Federation". Most senators abstained.
The revised law is something the regional authorities would have
gladly
avoided. What really upsets them is that the law introduces a
mixed
majoritary-proportional system of voting for regional legislatures.
The
so-called gubernatorial lists have been successfully tested in
numerous
regions, and the Duma considers that only party lists will be
able to
defeat this technique.
There is another important innovation as well: a mandatory two-
round
system at gubernatorial elections. It will not entirely negate
the effect
of incumbents using state resources, but will improve the chances
of
alternative candidates who inevitably lose to incumbents in the
first
round of voting.
Actually, most innovations are supposed to weaken the influence
of
incumbents in elections - this is a problem in all elections.
The most
controversial provision of the previous law has finally been removed
from
the text. It concerned the registration of candidates or lists.
From now
on, it will be impossible to deny a candidate (or list) registration
on
the grounds of providing untrue information about assets or income.
Traffic police and tax inspectorates will no longer play a deciding
role.
Voters must be informed that a certain candidate running for a
certain
office has provided false information about assets, but the voters
themselves will have to decide whether it is an honest mistake
or
malicious intent.
Election commissions will lose the right to disqualify candidates
for
violations during the campaign. A court decision will be needed
for that
no later than five days before voting (instead of three days under
the
old legislation).
Unfortunately the legislators failed to summon enough courage
to revoke
this disqualification power altogether, even though absolutely
everyone
admits that courts face unprecedented pressure and no one is surprised
when significant rivals are kicked out of the race through use
of the
courts. Vladimir Tumanov, former chairman of the Constitutional
Court,
says quite correctly that unlike the Russian system, in other
countries
it is possible to take legal action after the vote, having an
election
declared invalid by the court, if a serious breach of the law
is proved.
In other words, not everything is decided on voting day.
What counts
here is enabling individuals to vote as they think best.
With all its improvements, however, even the new legislation
does not
guarantee free and fair elections. It does not make tampering
by
incumbents impossible. It does not offer a solution to the serious
problem of dirty political techniques. We can only admit that
free and
fair elections are to a considerable extent a matter of political
culture
and maturity of society, and expect the passage of time and the
democratic habit of electing governments with minimal legislative
obstacles to make the election process more or less civilized
in Russia.
In any case, right-wing factions of the Duma are glad that they
have
made the basic law somewhat more democratic. Sergei Mitrokhin
of Yabloko
considers, however, that the law now includes some new flaws.
Mitrokhin: The formation of election
commissions will be considerably less democratic now: higher commissions
will have considerable influence over lower ones and the potential
to intervene in their decisions. The commissions may use various
sanctions against lower commissions and even order their disbandment.
I do not rule out the possibility, by the way, that all this is
being done for the upcoming presidential race. The Central Election
Commission wants a more manageable structure of local election
commissions to be able to control the outcome.
Question: What is missing in the election
legislation?
Sergei Mitrokhin: In my view, the lack
of legal regulation to cover the Vybory (Election) computer system
is one of the problems. These days, this is an instrument used
to brainwash the public and a tool to manipulate public opinion.
An appropriate law will be tabled soon, but I do not think it
will change the situation substantially, given the government
‘s comprehension of the problem. We will insist on at least
some public supervision over the system. In my view, we should
make sure that all observers are allowed to be present when the
data is entered into computers. We need to prosecute people for
entering incorrect data, it should be as serious an offense as
falsification of the results.. We should also have the law indicate
which bodies are permitted to technically maintain the system,
to prevent the secret services from performing this function.
We also have to set the lower threshold of voter turnout, because
a lot
of local government bodies do not get elected merely because voters
do
not care to turn up. The law specifies 20% but I think that it
is too
much. The situation when government bodies are not elected but
are
appointed, is far worse than when the choice is made by a politically
active minority. People will never vote again if they turn up
once and
vote, only to be told that their will and opinion did not really
matter.
I think we should fight the Unity party's harmful insistence that
a
higher voter turnout threshold be specified for gubernatorial
elections.
I see this as a provocation, aimed at ensuring the appointment
of
regional leaders on the pretext that too few voters bother to
come and
elect their own regional leader.
Question: What do you view as the most
important feature of the new legislation?
Sergei Mitrokhin: The provision that
50% of members of regional legislatures are to be elected by party
lists. We view this as a step in the direction of a true system
of parties in Russia. Besides, this is a serious attack on the
abuse of state resources by incumbent regional
leaders, since at least half of the legislature in each region
will be
independent of the regional leader. These members will not be
elected
just because the regional leader wants them on the legislature.
They will
be elected because they belong to a political party.
Unfortunately, the regions are given some breathing space because
the
law will come into full effect only in the middle of 2003. Until
then,
the regions themselves will choose their election system. I fail
to see
the need for the delay and attribute it to pressure applied by
certain
major lobbyists. Like St. Petersburg Governor Vladimir Yakovlev
- who
will have elections for the legislature of his region this autumn.
Neither do I rule out the possibility that some provisions of
the law
(like mandatory election by party lists) will annoy regional leaders
so
seriously that they may try to get the president to veto the law
and set
up a conciliation commission. Through the commission, regional
leaders
would have the law suitably amended. It would be a dangerous situation
indeed, as in the case when the Kremlin was so weak that it permitted
regional leaders to run for a third term in office. | 