Article
people first foundation
Top-violations Ukrainian and foreign observers agree that the local elections 31 Oct 2010 do not meet international standards only when significant gaps at all levels. The breach was reported the most negative: * The adoption of the new law before the elections, which exacerbate the imbalance in the representation of political parties in the territorial election commissions created many opportunities for “manipulation” of votes. * Block “false” branch “Batkivshshyna” Party in the region of Kiev and Lvov It also meant a real “Batkivshshyna” were blocked by competition in key areas and thoose 3800 (32%) 12 000 .* electoral disadvantage in territorial election commissions (TECS) has become a process of selection of obstacles for small parties or individual candidates. * Homes where candidates who have been unjustly fired from the EC Treaty, which later obtained court orders for registration are found in their delaying tactics This delay their entry into the event after the election .* TEC in direct violation of the principles of individual and secret ballot on election day due to lack of fully adopt the standard procedures of the organization .* The lack of training and strict procedures for quality control of Governors of printing ballots – many of ballots printed companies do not have the necessary licenses State, and in some houses too print the vote (43,000 Kharkiv and Ivano-Frankivsk 200 000). * Strange slow response of government and law enforcement officials to investigate reports of threats and pressure on candidates .* A violation of wheat counts, including falsifying the vote count seals. * Proof of processing exit polls to increase the apparent support of pro-government candidates. * Under pressure from the police and secret services of individual candidates to force them to participate in elections, and monitor pressure, forcing them to perform their duties in the polling place specific than thoose of their choice. * The refusal to accredit some international observers, without good reason. * Deliberate creation of false reasons for declaring the chicken in some areas, including transportation of ballots in the polls wrong, or exclusion of candidates from ballots that have not been officially eliminated from the race .* unexplained differences between the number of issued voting and the number of returned territorial and district electoral commissions .* The small amount of members of election commissions and lack of training, leading to slow and unprofessional work. * The passage of some candidates to vote in the last days before the election .* attempts to mass transport voters to vote for candidates in many areas sympathetic to the powers of administration.
The reaction of observers Reaction UnionHigh European Representative for International Relations and Security Policy “European Union” Ashton expressed concern at the local elections in Ukraine. In its opinion, the messages relayed by representatives of several observation missions violations during the elections on 31 October are undermining confidence in the ability of Ukraine to fulfill its election not to mention the strengthening of democracy. Representatives of the “Council of Europe” This mission observers noted local elections do not meet the full Council of Europe. Head of Delegation of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe-H. Mosler Törnström His comments focused on the fact that voting procedures do not meet European standards for fair elections, transparent and professionally organized. Meanwhile, President Wilfried Martens, the European People’s Party expressed its disappointment at the way the history of local elections, which are in force, that this last test a significant decrease compared with the democratic standards in Ukraine. member of the “green” faction Rebecca Haru correctly noted Ukrainian opposition parties should task the preparation of the political agenda of real merit. An observer from the “Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe N Mermahen” He noted that about 60% of the population is expected distortions and manipulations before the elections. credibility and legitimacy of the Ukrainian political system once again came into question. StatesThe Government response to the “United States” That statement said the local elections in Ukraine on 31 October were not a level of openness and fairness set out in recent presidential elections in early 2010. According to the U.S. government’s main source of problems on election day in the Local Elections Act adopted by Parliament in July this year, enabling administrative resources to be used to lobby local elections, creating an imbalance in the composition of election commissions as a result of complicated registration procedures and vote. November 3 in the U.S. “embassy” in Ukraine issued a statement described the elections on 31 October as a regression on recent presidential elections. The “National Democratic Institute,” noted that the environment surrounding the October 31 local elections was worse than the presidential elections earlier this year. reactions within UkraineChairman Olga “possibility” networks Ukrainian civil Ayvazovskaya announced that local elections in Ukraine took place in compliance with international standards as they do not provide a fair, transparent and democratic. According to the presidential statement of the commission ‘of Voters of Ukraine “(UVC) A. Chernenko, the elections were far from a breakthrough for democracy in Ukraine. Observers from the Civic Assembly of Ukraine “, which entered the country turned a blind eye to abuses of political power – democratic standards and to allow free fall into oblivion, they have. Assesses the local election campaign is the worst ever in the last 5 years. ReactionThe official that President of Ukraine noted that problems in the local elections due to imperfection in the electoral legislation. According to the President, had technical problems so, systematic violations of the electoral process were completely absent. Submitted by Minister of Foreign Affairs Konstantin Gryshchenko This explains Ukrainian democracy is still very alive today. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine announced that it expects a fruitful cooperation with the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe in the field of improvement of electoral legislation and plans to use its recommendations development of democratic institutions in Ukraine People first review:. damning verdict on the national and international recognition observe local elections in Ukraine on October 31 that it fell below international standards of democracy. Presidential Administration, the Ukrainian government and electoral commission should be congratulated, once again, to get into areas foot.Party is on track to win the election fairly, perhaps by a landslide, but certainly not by a significant margin, it was poor execution of the opposition parties. This is an opportunity for authorities to prove once and for all that Ukraine is a modern democratic state, which include and adhere to international electoral standards. All I had to do was to run to the book and the text of the elections, they would be welcomed around the world.. .. But they must win “their” way, not the legitimacy of the elections, but more suitable for school yard games. They had to give a gift of the president more power … This is despite the fact in the historical process, it completely undermines the confidence of national and international level, and still does more damage to national reputation already in tatters. If the authorities run a clean election, then the memory of 2004 “rigged” elections will be removed and Orange Revolution finally part of history. Since memory is enhanced, improving international stereotypes and encourage Ukraine’s opposition. Party of Regions What actually won? They may have more power but they are far less legitimacy, they can control over cities, but they lost the confidence of the Ukrainian people, the international community, international stock markets, investors and financiers, all on the eve of the big top with partners from the most important trading nation European Union.One must be done conclusion that the authorities are either naive or spectacularly that they have no real interest in forming relations with Europe, the elections will be considered as part of their “European values” test, that they really have failed. In Brussels, which They claim that can clean election law … he should never have been changed first. What the opposition can claim that only hysterical, but this is not the perspective of international observers in terms of gold is supported by inflated reports and pro-government media in Ukraine. The outcome of this election is not about who really won, but what is lost. The Presidency and the Government has lost confidence and its international respect. The Party of Regions after the financial aristocracy lost time that international investors are now even less reason to trust them. the country has lost its last shred of his reputation as a Democratic member of the community. Chosen Those who were lost because they will always be a question mark on their legitimacy and ultimately loss of people in many homes as their preferred candidate is no longer represent their interests. It is a victory for those in power or opposition, or people, open for these elections was the lowest ever recorded, and 7% of thoose, who participated in the poll voted against all candidates. Who won? one.Democracy Watch is an instructor of the week and people first Foundation aims to raise public awareness of government actions and how it affects the Ukrainian parliamentary democracy and democratic due process. The information is copyright free and may be copied, but we want that the comments are reproduced in full years and in conjunction with First Foundation people.
