Valery LEVANEUSKI - personal site  
September 19th, 2000. Posted in Author's articles

« Main page


L.Yermoshina, the chairman of Central Commission on selections, on Sunday 17.09.2000 has by vision stated that 99 % of cases of failures in filing of candidates are reasonable and lawful. The strangeness of such application consists that the specialists working in Central commission who prepare inferences, still at all did not learn «refusal» stuffs. But L.Yermoshina has already drawn inferences on the yielded problem. I.e. the outcome under Complaints of the unfulfilled candidates in the House of Representatives is known for her before consideration of a problem by specialists and the commission.

About proficiency of workers of the central commission it would be desirable to be intercepted special.

Let’s start from subscription lists on a collection of signatures in support of the future candidates. Main bodies of “violations” on which one signature of voters in subscription lists are recognized by invalid are not stipulated correcting. I.e. all correcting should, according to terms of electoral commissions to be special marked, otherwise, the signature is considered uncertain.

But in the Selective Code there is no SUCH cause of an adjudicating of the signature uncertain.

And the adjudicating the commission of the signature uncertain on the cause of not stipulated correcting is an arbitrariness.

There is no also such concept – CORRECTING. What to consider as correcting? The outlined character “O” is this correcting or not? And here interpret concept of CORRECTING, each term of the commission on the.

Moreover, when subscription lists struck root, the term of the commission, their acceptance reports were not compounded, and to determine: these correcting are made by the person whom or the term of the circumferential commission collected signatures, it is impossible. The commissions do not have any deed confirming, that subscription lists have been handed with correcting. Therefore, during surrender of pages of correcting was not.

Subscription lists were not foliated and now to determine: these are the handed pages or pages from a waste trash can, it is impossible.

The remark: the Initiative bunch of the future candidate, for example, has collected 2000 signatures his support. It has certified the yielded pages in public authorities. The legislation requires only 1000 signatures. Have handed 1200 signatures, remaining have rejected in a waste trash can. Somebody can determine now: what signatures were checked – from a waste trash can or handed in the commission?

Following problem is.

The central commission has developed such form of the protocol, on adjudicating uncertain signatures from which one to perceive why the signature is recognized by uncertain by whom it is recognized and when it is impossible. In the protocol quantity of uncertain signatures is underlined only. I.e. terms of the commission have looked at a ceiling and have determined that 70 signatures are uncertain. And you both want, and proved the return. Completely miss in the protocol and links to what signature is recognized by invalid (a surname, a name a patronymic of the voter).

In our judgment, each signature which one is recognized by uncertain should be specially mirrored in the act, with the direction of a surname of the voter and the causes on which one the yielded signature is recognized by invalid.

Second “arrester” is a declaration on incomes. What income to indicate in the declaration: gross or pure. Whether is the income sale of the old felt boot through a commission magazine If you on a rate have a W.C., it is necessary deposits it to the declaration or not. It is a lot of, many problems, and the commission does not yield articulating. Here also refuse in filing for not the barn or W.C. direction.

Third “arrester” -is party spirit. Only in Grodno it is refused in filing to three candidates for the reason that they “have hidden the party spirit. Candidates speak: «We have left a lot two months ago, here is document with printing and the signature».

Terms of the commission speaks: «We do not recognize your drift from a lot and we refuse in filing because of unauthenticated of data on party spirit».

Clerical work in circumferential and central electoral commissions I would name in a word “brothel”, and complete “brothel”. Is not present the protocols of method-document transfer having 4 the future candidates a huge value, private affairs are not strung together and not enumerated, miss the printing entering and reference numbers.

The commissions completely skip the Operating instruction on clerical work №13.

So, all conditions for mass juggling of election returns are created.


Valery Levaneuski

« | »

Note: Translated by means of machine translation. The original text in Russian is on a site or