Last Sunday Ukrainians had to cast their ballots again, during a repeat local election campaign. As resolved by the Central Election Committee, such repeat elections were held in 759 electoral districts where the candidates had collected a suspiciously similar majority of votes. These repeat elections were held based on court rulings, after handling the October 31 vote violation cases.
There were many such violations, as has been repeatedly stated within Ukraine and abroad. The latest statement to this effect was made by the MEPs Pawel Kowal (European Conservatives and Reformists, Poland) and Jan Kozlowski (European People’s Party, Poland), who had been sent as special observers on the initiative of EU Parliament President Jerzy Buzek.
Among the noted shortcomings were the belated ratification of the elections bill, denying party blocs the right to nominate their candidates, the placement of party numbers on the ballots (so that the Party of Regions came first in 85 percent of the electoral districts), and the presence of Batkivshchyna clone parties in Lviv and Kyiv oblasts.
The militia [the surviving Soviet appellation of the Ukrainian police – Ed.] have proudly reported no incidents during the local repeat election campaign on November 14. Oleksandr Chernenko, chairman of the Voters Committee of Ukraine, told The Day: “Naturally, there was less public attention paid to the repeat local elections. Proceeding from our data, we haven’t registered any transgressions and the casting of ballots took place in a much calmer atmosphere. Generally speaking, the local elections of 2010 were a problem. Falsifications were registered in certain regions, while the voting process was kept democratic elsewhere. However, this repeat local election campaign can only be regarded as a step backward; it should serve as a serious lesson for us.”
President Viktor Yanukovych said, “I admit that this election campaign had technical shortcomings, and that it went the hard way.” The logical question is what was there to impede its proper organization, considering that so much has been said about Ukraine’s inadequate election laws by domestic and European experts and journalists. Yanukovych says that it was “difficult to organize the counting of several kinds of ballots at the same time.” This should have been expected and arrangements should have been made. The president of Ukraine has declared that he has ordered changes to be made in the election laws, and that the task force involves Ukrainian and foreign experts. Godspeed, although one is reminded of such collaboration when working out the current law on local elections.
Another point is the absence of voter turnout statistics. Ukrainian legislation doesn’t require the Central Election Committee to publish such statistics, which means that there is ample room for fishing in troubled waters, and that a legislative upgrading is in order.
BYuT’s Oleh Babaiev, the newly elected mayor of Kremenchuk, serves as a graphic example. He addressed the first session of the city council, saying that he was leaving the Batkivshchyna Party: “The mayor is needed not only by those who are supporting this or that political party, not even by those who have voted for him. This mayor is needed by and responsible for each and everyone, primarily the residents of Kremenchuk. We can make quick progress and achieve well-being only by combining efforts with the central government, only by taking into account the needs and desires of all social strata in this city. On Monday the head of our council sent a clear signal to all of us when he declared that democracy doesn’t mean self-denigration but a constructive approach to life. If you have a competitive target-oriented program, you’re welcome to carry it out, and you’ll be assisted.”
As it was, President Yanukovych also said: “How can a city mayor be in opposition? I’ll beat the bejesus out of him to make him take proper care of the sewers, water and gas supplies. There will be no alternative and the people won’t tolerate such a situation.”
Was this part of the president’s statement that made Oleh Babaiev part company with Batkivshchyna? In any case, this is further proof of Ukraine’s political conjuncture — I don’t mean that all of them are timeservers, just those who are currently in power. Who of this number would ever give a hoot about the electorate’s interests?
Vote-counting battles are still underway in some regions of Ukraine [Den carried this article on November 16 — Ed.]. The Administrative and Appellate Court of Odesa turned down ex-Mayor
Eduard Hurvits’ claim charging the city election committee with inactivity. There is another Hurvits claim on court record, the one that challenges the legitimacy of the local elections.
As it was, Odesa’s election committee proclaimed Oleksii Kostusiev (Party of Regions) the winner on November 4.
In Kharkiv, the situation was very much the same. The local court of law rejected candidate mayor Arsen Avakov’s similar claim addressing the Central Election Committee, while the City Election Committee registered Hennadii Kernes as the newly elected mayor. Avakov persists in challenging Kernes’ post.
The ballots cast during the repeat local elections are still being processed, but the whole campaign is proof that Ukraine has taken a step away from all the democratic achievements — small as they may appear — made over the previous years. Yanukovych came to power as a result of a democratic election, but he has apparently failed to pass his first election test as president.
