OSCE Gives Mixed Review Of Russian Ruling Party's Win — RFE/RL
A September 19 statement by the independent monitoring organization Golos said the elections were "far from truly free and fair." It added that the situation has improved since 2011, but said "institutional changes [are still] needed to prevent fraud."
Election observers say the vote that strengthened the ruling United Russia party’s grip on parliament was marred by an array of shortcomings but was more transparently administered than previous elections.
Factors clouding the September 18 elections included legal restrictions, state control of the media, limitations on civil society, and widespread procedural irregularities, said Ilkka Kanerva, who headed the Organization for Security and Cooperation monitoring mission.
"The improved transparency and trust we have seen in the election administration are important steps, yet legal restrictions on basic rights continue to be a problem," Kanerva said in Moscow on September 19.
With about 95 percent of the ballots counted, United Russia was expected to take about 343 seats in the 450-seat State Duma, giving it far more than the two-thirds needed to amend the constitution.
Preliminary results announced on September 19 by the Central Election Commission (TsIK) showed United Russia with 54.28 percent of the party list vote, under which 225 Duma seats are assigned to candidates listed by political parties winning at least 5 percent of the ballots cast.
Candidates from United Russia, which is backed by President Vladimir Putin, also were leading in most of the 225 "single-mandate" constituencies, where the candidate with the most votes wins.
...
"In our domestic politics, we definitely must listen to and hear all the political forces, including the ones who failed to make it to the parliament," Putin said. "We ought to and we will develop a multiparty system in the Russian Federation and support civil society, including patriotically oriented NGOs."
In contrast to the OSCE, whose members include the United States, most Western European nations, along with Russia, monitors from the Russia-dominated Commonwealth of Independent States and Shanghai Cooperation Organization praised the elections as democratic and transparent. Monitors from both groups have routinely praised past votes in Russia and ex-Soviet republics that have been criticized by European observers.
"The elections were in line with the principles of carrying out democratic elections," CIS monitoring-mission head Vladimir Garkun said in Moscow on September 19. "They were open and competitive."
...
Alleged Violations
TsIK head Pamfilova said 181 reports of procedural violations had been received on election day. Results were annulled polling stations in Belgorod Oblast and in Rostov Oblast, while the TsIK is investigating alleged irregularities in Siberia’s Altai region.
Among the potential violations he cited were long lines of soldiers voting at stations where they were not registered and voters casting their ballots on tables instead of curtained-off voting booths.
A September 19 statement by the independent monitoring organization Golos said the elections were "far from truly free and fair." It added that the situation has improved since 2011, but said "institutional changes [are still] needed to prevent fraud."
A video posted on YouTube appeared to show a poll worker in the southern Rostov region dropping multiple sheets of paper into a ballot box. By midafternoon Moscow time, the group said it had received reports of 310 alleged violations by phone and 656 on its interactive website.
One video taken by a surveillance camera at a polling station in the southern city of Rostov-on-Don generated substantial discussion on Russian social media and online forums.
The video posted on the Golos website appeared to show a woman putting multiple paper ballots into a ballot box while two polling station workers stood shoulder-to-shoulder in front of the box, obscuring the box from bystanders’ view.
...
Weeks before the vote, authorities stepped up pressure on Golos and the independent polling agency Levada Center, labeling them "foreign agents" because they received funding from foreign sources. That label, which has echoes of Soviet policies aimed at undermining foreign influences, hampered the groups' work.
