CEC Secretary on Early Voting and Problems with

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 MINSK 000265

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/09/16
TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM ECON BO
SUBJECT: CEC Secretary on Early Voting and Problems with
Candidates during the Electoral Process

Ref: Minsk 223

Classified by Ambassador George Krol for Reasons 1.4 (B,D)


1. (C) Summary: Poloffs met with Central Election
Commission (CEC) Secretary Nikolai Lozovik on March 9.
Lozovik at first explained Belarus' early voting process
and answered questions concerning the censoring of
opposition candidate television speeches and the March 2
beating of a candidate at the hand of security forces.
Lozovik admitted his dissatisfaction with unequal press
coverage and President Lukashenko's harsh public
statements, but claimed opposition candidates provoke the
situation. Lozovik opined that security forces were
justified in how they handled opposition candidate
Aleksandr Kozulin on March 2 and again criticized the OSCE
for negative assessments of Belarus' election process. End
Summary.


2. (C) Pol/Econ Chief and Poloff met with CEC Secretary
Nikolai Lozovik on March 9 to discuss the procedures for
early voting. The meeting started with Lozovik on the
offensive, but after being questioned about visible
irregularities in the election process, Lozovik became
cautious with his answers.

Early Voting
--------------


3. (C) Lozovik explained that according to the electoral
code, early voting will begin on March 14, five days before
Election Day, and last until March 18. Polling stations
will be opened between 10:00 Q 14:00 and 16:00 Q 19:00 and
will have no less than two election commission members
present at all times. The only difference between
elections and early voting is that fewer election committee
members must be present for the latter. The process will
be open to domestic and international observers and the CEC
expects 15 percent of the electorate to vote at this time.


4. (C) Lozovik, in his usual nature, claimed that Belarus'
early voting process was a common "democratic" process
similar to those implemented in the U.S. and West. He
cited the U.S.' system of absentee ballots and considered
it more scandalous since votes can be cast two and a half
months before Election Day, whereas in Belarus, votes
cannot be cast earlier than five days before. According to
Lozovik, Belarus' early voting process gives citizens a
chance to vote at a more convenient time if they are unable
to make it to polling stations on Election Day.

Lozovik Attacks OSCE
--------------


5. (C) P/E Chief asked Lozovik why OSCE/ODIHR observers in
the past found Belarus' early voting process problematic.
Lozovik claimed to not know, opining that 90% of
international observers in the 2004 Parliamentary elections
believed early voting was done fairly and openly, but the
"final ODIHR report only represented the opinion of the
dissenting 10%." Lozovik sharply criticized the OSCE,
claiming that its past reports were "political" rather than
legal documents that contained nothing but "betrayal."
Lozovik called the OSCE's reports "insulting" and "stupid"
in context. Lozovik claimed to have developed a good
relationship with ODIHR observation mission head Ahrens,
who regularly meets with Lozovik to inform him on ODIHR
conclusions, but he ridiculed the OSCE/ODIHR for
distributing reports of election violations before
verifying them or discussing them with the CEC.

Lozovik Goes on Defensive, Admits Mistakes
--------------


6. (C) P/E Chief and Poloff began asking pointed questions
about visible irregularities in the election process.
Poloff asked Lozovik whether it was fair for Lukashenko's
picture and platform to dominate the front pages of all
state-controlled newspapers while opposition candidate
platforms were located on the inner pages. Lozovik
admitted that he was not happy with the unequal coverage of
candidates, but he could not offer a solution or an
explanation. [Note: At this point in the meeting, Lozovik
opened his notebook and began taking notes.]


7. (C) P/E Chief and Poloff quizzed Lozovik as to why the
state-controlled Belarusian National Television (BT)
censored criticism of the President from opposition

MINSK 00000265 002 OF 003


candidate Aleksandr Lozovik's March 2 TV speech and his and
10+ Coalition candidate Aleksandr Milinkevich's radio
addresses, whereas Lukashenko was allowed to call the
opposition "thugs" on live television. The CEC secretary
expressed disappointment with the President's "harsh"
statements and wished he had "used a softer tone," but
since the presentation was live, it was impossible to edit
the content before it reached viewers.


8. (C) As for censoring Kozulin and Milinkevich, Lozovik
claimed that BT was following Belarus' broadcast laws that
prevent people from slandering or libeling the President
with accusations that cannot be proved. Poloff disagreed,
citing as an example Milinkevich's censored remarks.
Lukashenko mistakenly claimed in a recent speech that 15th
Century Belarusian writer Francis Skaryni lived in St.
Petersburg, even though the city was built 160 years after
Skaryni's death. Milinkevich could prove that Lukashenko
said this statement simply by presenting a recording of
Lukashenko's speech. Lozovik offered no comment.


9. (C) The CEC Secretary moved to criticizing Kozulin,
claiming that nine minutes was not edited from Kozulin's
March 2 TV address, as Kozulin has claimed. According to
Lozovik, Kozulin's speech was edited, but it still lasted
30 minutes, proving that such allegations were part of the
opposition's propaganda campaign to create scandals.
[Comment: It is true that Kozulin's March 2 TV address
lasted 30 minutes even with the edits. Poloffs have not
found an explanation for this, but it could be that Kozulin
ran over his time when recording the speech, giving BT a
"legitimate" reason to edit as they saw fit.]

The CEC Does Not Promote Censorship
--------------


10. (C) Lozovik claimed the CEC, in general, did not
approve of censoring candidates, but the CEC did not have
the authority to determine whether a candidate's statements
are right or wrong. If candidates are offended by
another's comments, then they must file a complaint and
settle the matter via a lawsuit in the courts. Lozovik,
however, immediately contradicted himself when he said the
CEC could disqualify a candidate if it feels the candidate
purposely slandered and libeled another candidate.

Lozovik: Security Forces in the Right for Beating Kozulin
-------------- --------------


11. (C) According to Lozovik, Kozulin's actions at the
Press Center on February 17 and his March 2 beating were
provocations on the part of Kozulin (reftel). Lozovik
opined that the purpose of Kozulin's actions and his
statements about "being a Marine" were to get a strong
reaction, such as bruises, to aid in his campaign. Lozovik
poignantly added that the security services had taken the
"necessary and proper" action in dealing with Kozulin. P/E
Chief told the CEC Secretary that the beating and detention
of Kozulin, his supporters, and journalists did not seem at
all necessary and tainted the electoral process.


12. (C) Lozovik opined that Milinkevich's practice of
assembling unsanctioned meetings with voters was also a
provocation and violated election regulations. P/E Chief
noted that opposition candidates often complain that local
authorities systematically deny access to venues, permit
them to use only the smallest venues in town, or do not
grant permission at all to meet with voters. Lozovik, with
his guard down, admitted that seeking permission from local
authorities to meet with voters may be a bad law, but
nonetheless, it was a law that needed to be followed.
Lozovik opined that a "mutual language" can be found
between the opposition and local authorities, but the
opposition had decided to continue with its current illegal
approach. Lozovik agreed with P/E Chief that the electoral
code requires the CEC to provide assistance to candidates
in securing venues for campaign rallies, but countered the
CEC has helped the candidates. He was not willing to state
that the CEC was doing all it could to help the candidates
find venues.

Comment
--------------


13. (C) Once again, Lozovik maintained the democratic
nature of Belarus' election process and its superiority
over U.S. democracy. But after being confronted with tough
questions, Lozovik let his guard down, admitted

MINSK 00000265 003 OF 003


discrepancies favoring Lukashenko, and failed to give
reasonable explanations. Lozovik's statements, which at
times seemed to be his personal opinion rather than the CEC
stance, sounded similar to those of other Lukashenko
bureaucrats who seem to have trouble believing and
defending the President's policy.

KROL