The movement “Golos” carried out long- and short-term observation at all stages of the election campaign during the 2018 presidential race in the Russian Federation.
In the preliminarily assessment of the presidential elections, “Golos” acknowledges the definite strong result of the winning candidate but regretfully declares that the movement does not recognize these election as truly fair, i.e. fully consistent with the Constitution, the laws of the Russian Federation, and international election standards because the results were achieved in an unfree, unequal, and uncompetitive election campaign. This fact does not allow “Golos”, therefore, to assert that the will of the voters was expressed as the result of a free election campaign.
The new voting procedure “at the current location” was used for executing compulsion to vote: there were records of special voter lists, organized voter transfers, and activities to monitor voters’ participation in the voting process. Many reports came from polling stations located on or near the grounds of student dormitories, colleges, and large enterprises. Voter “migration” within districts significantly exceeded voter “migration” between districts. In total, about 5.7 million people applied for voting “at the current location”. The number of cases of “migration” between districts seems to be just over 1 million voters, and the “migration” within districts is estimated at more than 4.5 million. In total, almost 30% of the total number of “migrants” were attached to a limited number of 4,821 (out of approx. 96.000) polling stations.
Recorded cases of fraud and violations regarding election procedures, including during ballot counting, require additional verification and detailed analysis of videotapes from the polling stations, which the movement “Golos” began on 19 March.
Main observations:
- limited-competition environment;
- artificial mobilization of an administratively-dependent electorate;
- many cases of pressure on voters expressing the wish not to vote;
- coverage by the mass media characterized by manipulative and tendentious information;
- more convenient voting system for the voters in a polling station other than the place of residence, however, not eliminating the possibility of administrative abuse;
- positive role of election commissions; interaction with the observer community has improved;
- increased pressure on civil activists and independent observers.
See the full preliminary statement here.