Bogush, Gleb

<intR>²Dok

Voting in Russia: Please Don’t Call it"Elections"Gleb Bogush 2019-09-25T07:40:18On September 8, numerous Russian regions voted in the framework of a so-called “single voting day”. Most significantly, Moscow voted for the members ofCity Council (“Duma”), and Russia’s second-largest city Saint Petersburg was toelect its governor. It would be a mistake, however, to draw any conclusions on thesentiments of the Russian people from the results as the voting process was skewedat every stage of the so-called “elections”.During Putin’s reign, the government has always controlled the regional electionsin Russia and they never brought many surprises. “United Russia”, the ruling party,easily wins the majority in most of the regional legislatures, as well as the governors’positions. Given the size and diversity of the country, some “irregularities” happen(such as the rare victory of “systemic opposition”), but they have never been asevere challenge for the regime. Moreover, since 2000, Putin’s government hassucceeded in the “centralization” of a formally federal country, having built a so-called “vertical of power”, which has deprived the local legislatures of most of theircontrolling powers. In Moscow, a city of more than 10 million inhabitants and 7,2million registered voters, a Mossovet, a vibrant city parliament with 450 membersand control powers has turned to the 45 members rubber-stamp Duma. In theessential question – the city budget, which exceeds 37 billion Euros a year – the city“parliament” has just an advisory vote.Unlike federal elections, local campaigns are not subject to international scrutiny andpublic attention is weak. The authorities do their best to lower public awareness evenfurther. It is not at all accidental that the campaign in the two biggest Russian citieswas scheduled for August which is the traditional vacation time in Russia.Against all expectations, however, this year’s regional “elections” have become apretext for significant political turbulences which triggered the most massive massprotests in Moscow since 2011-2013. Authorities stifled peaceful protests withunprecedented brutality and the prosecution of protesters on various grounds are stillongoing.Searching for logic where there is none to be foundRussian and western media analyze the results of the “elections”, trying to findsome political logic, seeing the signs of upcoming change. While the revival of themass protests in Russian regions is indeed indicative, calling the September vote“elections”, in my opinion, would be fundamentally wrong. Discussing the “elections”and their results indeed diverts the Russian and international public from the natureand the trends of contemporary Russian politics.- 1 -In the following paragraphs, I will explain this point, basing primarily on the vote forMoscow City Council and the Governor of Saint Petersburg due to their politicalimportance. Similar processes and practices, however, are taking place in otherRussian regions having voted on September 8.To begin with, it was an election without any meaningful choice. Every free andfair election must be based on the voters having at least some choice amongthe candidates representing a political spectrum, and, at best, the opportunityto be elected. The Russian system of candidates’ registration is not only thebeginning but also a crucial part of manipulation. The electoral laws and controllingauthorities imposed numerous unrealistic requirements on candidates which makethe registration unfeasible. The broad discretion of the electoral commissionsempowered them with the authority to dismiss any undesirable candidate fromnomination. In Moscow, each independent candidate, including some popularpoliticians, such as Ilya Yashin, a head of the municipal council in one of Moscow’sdistricts, had to collect 5000 supporting signatures within a short period. Mostof the opposition candidates complied with this draconical requirement and theprocess was visible in the city. The local electoral commissions, based on “expertopinions” rendered some of the signatures invalid. The candidates’ appeals to courtsfailed. Election officials generally threw out the signatures, often claiming that thesignatories did not exist, even when these people, some of them well-known in thecity, such as constitutional law professor Elena Lukyanova, insisted that they hadindeed signed the candidate’s petition.In Saint Petersburg, all independent candidates had to proceed through so-called“municipal filters” (collecting votes of municipal deputies), and, as a result, theruling party effectively blocked all candidates that could have threatened theacting governor. The only remaining candidate who could collect some votes, arepresentative of the “official” communist party and well-known film-director Bortkowithdrew from the “race” a few days before the vote.Heavy restrictions in the registration of candidates coupled with the elimination of“protest” options, such as “against all” voting and minimum turnout requirements,have led to the disappearance of any meaningful choice. In order to “win” the vote bya simple majority, the ruling party’s candidate merely has to eliminate any potentiallystrong candidate.Secondly, the campaign itself was organized in a way to discourage the active partof the electorate, and “mobilize” the passive. Media coverage was almost non-existent. The ruling party candidates, even regional leaders, in Moscow did notindicate their affiliation with unpopular “United Russia”, and declared themselvesas “independent”. In Saint Petersburg, the same “camouflage” was used by theacting governor Alexander Beglov. Opposition leader and candidate for Moscow’smayoral election in 2013, Alexey Navalny, introduced a system of “smart voting”,a modification of the tactic which brought fruits in the parliamentary elections of2011. It offered his supporters the possibility to vote for the most popular candidateother than the one supported by United Russia party. In many cases this tactic wassuccessful but some “smart voting” stories are ridiculous. For example, AlexanderSolovyov, a man whom voters have never even seen, has the same name as an- 2 -opposition candidate in that district who was barred from running, and the authoritiesinitially put his “double” on the ballot only to confuse voters. As a result, the “fake”Solovyov won more votes than the openly pro-government candidate.In any event,“smart voting” could not prevent the pro-government majority and just underlined theabsurdity of the campaign.Thirdly, the vote itself was traditionally marked by good old practices of“administrative resource” and electoral fraud. The turnout, slightly more than 21% inMoscow, should be seen against the “administrative resource” background. Almostevery public hospital or school employee received instructions from its administrationto appear on the polling station. Some were told to take selfies at the polling stationto “prove” to their superiors that they have “fulfilled their civic duty”.When the manipulator is not even trying anymore…In Moscow, for the first time, the Russian state-affiliated sociological services refusedto publish the results of the exit-polls, claiming that voters refused to answer thequestions en masse. The results of the ruling party must also be seen against thisbackground. The results have been achieved by a simple majority, so the regionallegislatures and leaders have been “elected” by a marginal part of the population.The results of the vote in Moscow and in other regions, where the candidates of theruling party surprisingly failed due to “smart voting” are also indicative.“Elections” like those of September 8 do not and cannot say anything about thereal political preferences of the Russian people, as well as the state of the Russiansociety. It is equally difficult to judge the belief and trust of the Russian people indemocratic institutions. We simply do not know what people in Russia think. Givingany weight to these “elections” means making the same mistake as relying onthe public opinion polls and supporting the Russian government’s myth of eternalsupport of the Russian regime by the population. The fact is that Russians areincreasingly disappointed by the endless Putin’s rule, and the Russian civil societyis becoming more vibrant and demanding. But this is not reflected in the Septembervote.- 3 -

Voting in Russia: Please Don’t Call it "Elections"

https://intr2dok.vifa-recht.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/mir_derivate_00007410/Voting_in_Russia_Please_Dont_Call_it_Elections.pdf

Voting in Russia: Please Don’t Call it "Elections"

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

<intR>²Dok