Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07MOSCOW5745
2007-12-07 11:36:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Moscow
Cable title:
GOLOS INITIAL ASSESSMENT OF THE DUMA ELECTION
VZCZCXYZ0000 PP RUEHWEB DE RUEHMO #5745/01 3411136 ZNY CCCCC ZZH P 071136Z DEC 07 FM AMEMBASSY MOSCOW TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5728 INFO RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE RUEHXD/MOSCOW POLITICAL COLLECTIVE
C O N F I D E N T I A L MOSCOW 005745
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/07/2017
TAGS: PGOV KDEM RS
SUBJECT: GOLOS INITIAL ASSESSMENT OF THE DUMA ELECTION
Classified By: Ambassador William J. Burns for reason 1.4(d).
C O N F I D E N T I A L MOSCOW 005745
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/07/2017
TAGS: PGOV KDEM RS
SUBJECT: GOLOS INITIAL ASSESSMENT OF THE DUMA ELECTION
Classified By: Ambassador William J. Burns for reason 1.4(d).
1. (C) Summary: In a December 4 press conference, the
USAID-funded voting rights NGO Golos reported widespread
violations and irregularities in the December 2 State Duma
elections. While much of its information is anecdotal, Golos
did provide cursory statistical findings of anomalies, most
notably major increases in absentee and home voting,
discrepancies between manual and electronic voting, and the
increase in registered voters over the past four months.
Golos will publish on December 11 a detailed assessment of
the elections based upon reports and documents from its 3,000
observers combined with a review of the election results
published by the Central Elections Commission (CEC). While
some Golos election observers encountered problems, Golos
observers were present at over 2,000 polling stations during
voting and ballot counting. End Summary.
--------------
A First Look at the Statistics
--------------
2. (SBU) On December 4, Golos Director Liliya Shibanova and
elections experts presented the initial evaluation of the
Duma elections. From reports collected by its 3,000
independent journalist-observers and more than 1,500
election-day calls to its hotline, Golos described widespread
violations of election laws, harassment of some observers,
and failure of regional election commissions to follow
regulations. Examples included a few dozen polling areas
refusing entry to accredited Golos journalists or forcing
them to leave, refusal of some district and regional
elections commissions to provide results to observers, and
pressure on students and employees from state enterprises to
vote for United Russia. Nevertheless, Golos was able to be
present for the counting of ballots and immediate posting of
the results in more than 2,000 of Russia's approximately
95,000 polling stations.
3. (SBU) With the caveat that Golos had yet to conduct a
full-scale analysis of the data, elections experts Arkady
Lyubarev, Aleksandr Kynev, and Andrey Buzin presented an
initial look at telling statistics from the elections:
-- Number of registered voters: Lyubarev, the Director of the
Elections Monitoring Program at the Independent Elections
Institute, first noted that the number of registered voters
had increased from 107 million on August 8 when the electoral
districts were announced to more than 108 million on election
day. One region, Nenets Autonomous Okrug, increased the
number of voters on the rolls by 10% during that time.
"While there may be a very good explanation for this, it is
certainly legitimate to question where these million voters
came from."
-- Discrepancies between manual and electronic voting sites:
Lyubarev cited a difference that he had observed between
Moscow city precincts with electronic balloting and those
without. At the 45 sites with electronic balloting, United
Russia averaged 50% of the vote, and at the 76 with manual
counts, it averaged 56%. Conversely, the Communist Party
(KPRF) and Yabloko both did better at the electronic sites:
KPRF averaged 15% with electronic balloting, and 13% without;
Yabloko drew 6.7% with electronic balloting, and 5.1% without.
-- Decrease in spoiled ballots: Kynev noted that, contrary to
expectations, the number of spoiled ballots (e.g., those made
invalid as a protest vote) fell from 3-5% in the spring
regional elections to just over 1% in the Duma election, even
though the "against all" option had been removed from the
ballot and the number of parties on the ballot had been
reduced.
-- Increases in Absentee and Home Voting: Andrey Buzin, the
Chairman of the Interregional Society of Voters, reported
that the number of absentee ballots had almost doubled from
0.9% of the votes cast in 2003 to 1.7% this year. (Note:
"Absentee ballots" are not the mail-in type like in the
United States, but are instead official permits for voters to
vote at a polling site other than where they are registered.
Voters must still cast their ballots in person. End note.)
He noted that an even greater influence on the outcome was
the number of people who had voted at home, which increased
from 5.5% in 2003 to 6.4% in 2007. "Going to people in their
homes or in hospitals is not illegal, but it is another
example of the pressure that the local authorities are
applying to the citizens."
4. (SBU) Kynev was certain that the vote had been
manipulated, and spoke of "administrative pressure" placed on
students and employees of government institutions, but he
also acknowledged that it would be impossible to prove fraud
in these cases. "When citizens mark the ballot by
themselves, it's a legal vote, but we still understand that
official pressure has an unwanted impact on the voter's
choice." Kynev also acknowledged that, fraud or no, United
Russia would still have won a majority in this election, but
that the major difference was between a simple and a
constitutional majority.
5. (SBU) Buzin and Kynev were dismissive of claims that the
elections were open and honest. Buzin noted that Golos had
already been criticized by CEC Chairman Viktor Churov for
making unsubstantiated claims, none of which would stand up
in court to overturn the election result. But he placed the
blame back on Churov and the regional CECs for violating the
Election Law by withholding access to data that would support
such claims, such as the refusal of some local elections
commissions to provide certified copies of the results at
polling stations until after they had been collated by the
regional elections commission. Buzin also noted that
regardless of whether it would hold up in court, it was
obvious that the Soviet-style 99% turnout in the North
Caucasus was fraudulent. Kynev dismissed comments endorsing
the election results by some human rights leaders, such as
Moscow Bureau of Human Rights Director Aleksandr Brod, whom
he labeled as co-opted by the Kremlin. "Brod can no longer
be considered an independent observer. He has accepted an
appointment by the Kremlin and can now be controlled by them."
--------------
Next Steps
--------------
6. (C) Shibanova predicted that Yabloko, the Union of Right
Forces (SPS),and the KPRF would challenge the legitimacy of
these elections in court. Golos Deputy Director Grigoriy
Melkonyants doubted that these cases would find any traction
in the courts, and thought that the KPRF would have the best
chance at showing actual damages. Speaking candidly, he said
that it appeared that the regional elections committees had
siphoned votes from the KPRF for the benefit of United
Russia, Just Russia (SR) and the Liberal Democratic Party
(LDPR). He cautioned that he did not want to make an
official judgment until Golos had a chance to organize and
digest the data from observers and the CEC.
7. (SBU) Golos plans to spend the next week analyzing the
election results and the reports from its observers
throughout the country. Kynev reported that on election day
Golos observers had collected the notarized election results
(called "protocols") on site at more than 2,000 polling
places across the country, and that Golos would analyze and
compare these protocols against the results published on the
CEC website. Golos plans to report on its findings on
December 11.
BURNS
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/07/2017
TAGS: PGOV KDEM RS
SUBJECT: GOLOS INITIAL ASSESSMENT OF THE DUMA ELECTION
Classified By: Ambassador William J. Burns for reason 1.4(d).
1. (C) Summary: In a December 4 press conference, the
USAID-funded voting rights NGO Golos reported widespread
violations and irregularities in the December 2 State Duma
elections. While much of its information is anecdotal, Golos
did provide cursory statistical findings of anomalies, most
notably major increases in absentee and home voting,
discrepancies between manual and electronic voting, and the
increase in registered voters over the past four months.
Golos will publish on December 11 a detailed assessment of
the elections based upon reports and documents from its 3,000
observers combined with a review of the election results
published by the Central Elections Commission (CEC). While
some Golos election observers encountered problems, Golos
observers were present at over 2,000 polling stations during
voting and ballot counting. End Summary.
--------------
A First Look at the Statistics
--------------
2. (SBU) On December 4, Golos Director Liliya Shibanova and
elections experts presented the initial evaluation of the
Duma elections. From reports collected by its 3,000
independent journalist-observers and more than 1,500
election-day calls to its hotline, Golos described widespread
violations of election laws, harassment of some observers,
and failure of regional election commissions to follow
regulations. Examples included a few dozen polling areas
refusing entry to accredited Golos journalists or forcing
them to leave, refusal of some district and regional
elections commissions to provide results to observers, and
pressure on students and employees from state enterprises to
vote for United Russia. Nevertheless, Golos was able to be
present for the counting of ballots and immediate posting of
the results in more than 2,000 of Russia's approximately
95,000 polling stations.
3. (SBU) With the caveat that Golos had yet to conduct a
full-scale analysis of the data, elections experts Arkady
Lyubarev, Aleksandr Kynev, and Andrey Buzin presented an
initial look at telling statistics from the elections:
-- Number of registered voters: Lyubarev, the Director of the
Elections Monitoring Program at the Independent Elections
Institute, first noted that the number of registered voters
had increased from 107 million on August 8 when the electoral
districts were announced to more than 108 million on election
day. One region, Nenets Autonomous Okrug, increased the
number of voters on the rolls by 10% during that time.
"While there may be a very good explanation for this, it is
certainly legitimate to question where these million voters
came from."
-- Discrepancies between manual and electronic voting sites:
Lyubarev cited a difference that he had observed between
Moscow city precincts with electronic balloting and those
without. At the 45 sites with electronic balloting, United
Russia averaged 50% of the vote, and at the 76 with manual
counts, it averaged 56%. Conversely, the Communist Party
(KPRF) and Yabloko both did better at the electronic sites:
KPRF averaged 15% with electronic balloting, and 13% without;
Yabloko drew 6.7% with electronic balloting, and 5.1% without.
-- Decrease in spoiled ballots: Kynev noted that, contrary to
expectations, the number of spoiled ballots (e.g., those made
invalid as a protest vote) fell from 3-5% in the spring
regional elections to just over 1% in the Duma election, even
though the "against all" option had been removed from the
ballot and the number of parties on the ballot had been
reduced.
-- Increases in Absentee and Home Voting: Andrey Buzin, the
Chairman of the Interregional Society of Voters, reported
that the number of absentee ballots had almost doubled from
0.9% of the votes cast in 2003 to 1.7% this year. (Note:
"Absentee ballots" are not the mail-in type like in the
United States, but are instead official permits for voters to
vote at a polling site other than where they are registered.
Voters must still cast their ballots in person. End note.)
He noted that an even greater influence on the outcome was
the number of people who had voted at home, which increased
from 5.5% in 2003 to 6.4% in 2007. "Going to people in their
homes or in hospitals is not illegal, but it is another
example of the pressure that the local authorities are
applying to the citizens."
4. (SBU) Kynev was certain that the vote had been
manipulated, and spoke of "administrative pressure" placed on
students and employees of government institutions, but he
also acknowledged that it would be impossible to prove fraud
in these cases. "When citizens mark the ballot by
themselves, it's a legal vote, but we still understand that
official pressure has an unwanted impact on the voter's
choice." Kynev also acknowledged that, fraud or no, United
Russia would still have won a majority in this election, but
that the major difference was between a simple and a
constitutional majority.
5. (SBU) Buzin and Kynev were dismissive of claims that the
elections were open and honest. Buzin noted that Golos had
already been criticized by CEC Chairman Viktor Churov for
making unsubstantiated claims, none of which would stand up
in court to overturn the election result. But he placed the
blame back on Churov and the regional CECs for violating the
Election Law by withholding access to data that would support
such claims, such as the refusal of some local elections
commissions to provide certified copies of the results at
polling stations until after they had been collated by the
regional elections commission. Buzin also noted that
regardless of whether it would hold up in court, it was
obvious that the Soviet-style 99% turnout in the North
Caucasus was fraudulent. Kynev dismissed comments endorsing
the election results by some human rights leaders, such as
Moscow Bureau of Human Rights Director Aleksandr Brod, whom
he labeled as co-opted by the Kremlin. "Brod can no longer
be considered an independent observer. He has accepted an
appointment by the Kremlin and can now be controlled by them."
--------------
Next Steps
--------------
6. (C) Shibanova predicted that Yabloko, the Union of Right
Forces (SPS),and the KPRF would challenge the legitimacy of
these elections in court. Golos Deputy Director Grigoriy
Melkonyants doubted that these cases would find any traction
in the courts, and thought that the KPRF would have the best
chance at showing actual damages. Speaking candidly, he said
that it appeared that the regional elections committees had
siphoned votes from the KPRF for the benefit of United
Russia, Just Russia (SR) and the Liberal Democratic Party
(LDPR). He cautioned that he did not want to make an
official judgment until Golos had a chance to organize and
digest the data from observers and the CEC.
7. (SBU) Golos plans to spend the next week analyzing the
election results and the reports from its observers
throughout the country. Kynev reported that on election day
Golos observers had collected the notarized election results
(called "protocols") on site at more than 2,000 polling
places across the country, and that Golos would analyze and
compare these protocols against the results published on the
CEC website. Golos plans to report on its findings on
December 11.
BURNS