«

»

SECRECY OF PRESCHEDULED VOTING

Now, the election to the local Councils has been held. Attitudes of the official authorities, opposition and the international community have been spoken out and widely spread by the mass media. The authorities are satisfied with the election; lawyers and opposition claim there were a lot of violations of the election legislation and democratic character of the election raises many questions. To complete the picture, we need to know what voters think of how the election campaign was carried. As we see, only one fifth of the respondents confirmed that there were many violations of law during the election, and among them there are 4-fold more respondents who voted for candidates-opponents of A. Lukashenko than those who supported candidates-supporters of A. Lukashenko (See Table 1).
Table 1. Distribution of answers to the question “The opposition and the independent observers claim there were plenty of violations or arbitrary rule within the election commissions during the recent election to the local Councils. Do you agree?”, %

And 36% of respondents believe there weren’t any violations or arbitrary rule of the election commissions. Such figures can be apparently explained by the fact that the opposition and the independent observers (about 40% of respondents saw them present at the voting stations) spoke more of the violations inconspicuous for a general voter and happening in their absence. Thus, the institute of prescheduled voting raised, as usual, the greatest claims. However, only 6.4% of the respondents noted they were forced to cast votes ahead of schedule (See Table 2).

Table 2. Distribution of answers to the question “Did anyone force you to vote ahead of schedule at the recent election to the local Councils or not?”, %

And although among those who gave preference to candidates-opponents of A. Lukashenko this indicator is nearly twofold higher that isn’t enough to say the compulsion had a mass character. In addition, among those who voted ahead of schedule only 10.2% said they were forced to vote for particular candidates. Yet, the election did well without the North Korean crowding. And here is why without: according to data of the Central Election Commission, 20.7% took part in the pre-scheduled voting. This indicator almost twice differs from what the very respondents said (See Table 3).

Table 3. Distribution of answers to the question “When did you vote?” (more than one answer is possible)

Such discrepancy supports accusations of the independent observers and opposition who claim it was during the period of pre-scheduled voting – when control over ballot boxes is hindered – that they threw in the ballots that would ensure victory to “proper” candidates. It is interesting that the difference between the data of the Central Election Commission and IISEPS data on participation in the voting (73.4-65.8=7.6%) and in the pre-scheduled voting (20.7-12.5=8.2%) practically coincides. This drives to the idea that the increase in appearance rate was provided exactly during the period of pre-scheduled voting.
If the assumption is true, this means the authorities needn’t take more pains promoting their candidates by some other, more open and detectable means. The fact that such support occurred and wasn’t quite evident is demonstrated in Tables 4 and 5.

Table 4. Distribution of answers to the question “Did all candidates have, in your opinion, equal chances at the recent election to the local Councils?”, %

Table 5. Distribution of answers to the question “Did the authorities support any candidate in your voting district?”, %

The number of the respondents who said all candidates had equal chances exceeds 1.5-fold the number of those who stick to the opposite viewpoint. Yet, the situation is mirror-like among those who voted for candidates-opponents of A. Lukashenko. But if considering the answers on the situation in particular voting districts, majority of the respondents noted that the authorities still supported their candidates. Standpoints of those who voted for candidates-supporters of A. Lukashenko and their opponents are mirror-like on this issue.
However, in accordance with Table 6, voters were quite free in their choice – over 90% of respondents said they weren’t forced to vote for a particular candidate. This time answers given by representatives of the compared groups of voters do not have any discrepancy. But as for those who were forced to vote ahead of schedule, one third of them did vote ahead of schedule.

Table 6. Distribution of answers to the question ” Did anyone force you to vote for a particular candidate at the recent election to the local Councils or not?”, %

Summarizing the said above and based on voters’ opinion, we can conclude that during the election campaign the authorities supported their candidates, although this hadn’t become a crucial factor. A regular voter might think all candidates were in equal terms. As we could see, it wasn’t so. But the disparity seems hadn’t played a crucial role either. The major claims against the official results of the voting concern non-transparency of the data on participation in prescheduled voting. The disclosed discrepancy gives validity to the accusations of those who consider the voting results were ensured by the authorities exactly during that period.