Need for Reform: Impact of Irregular Absentee Ballots and Workplace Intimidation on 2016 Parliamentary Elections in Russia

On September 8th, 2013, Sergei Sobyanin, the long serving mayor of Moscow won re-election in a race watched closely by international observers and the Russian people alike. Sobyanin’s victory was not the most important item from that election – the opposition candidate Alexei Navalny managed to garner nearly 30% of the vote. Yet this result prompted numerous protests and exhortations of vote fraud from the opposition given Sobyanin managed to avoid a head-to-head runoff by 30,000 votes.1 Subsequently, Navalny petitioned the state courts to invalidate the election because of the appearance of discrepancies in the absentee ballots (domые голосы). Navalny said at after handing in the lawsuit that “there is incontrovertible evidence in these boxes. We will do everything to protect the votes of Muscovites that were cast for candidates including myself.”2 Navalny’s camp also charged that employers were threatening employees with dismissals and students with expulsion from university if they did not vote for preferred candidates under the United Russia banner, President Vladimir Putin’s party. Despite the increased attention on voter fraud following the 2011 parliamentary elections and the success of opposition candidates in recent polls, there still exist grave concerns about the integrity of the poll and protections of voters in Russia. As shown by these allegations, continued abuses of absentee ballots, fraud and voter intimidation will mar the 2016 elections and cast further doubt on the legitimacy of the political process in Russia unless reform of the absentee ballot process and enhanced protection of the voter is implemented.

Absentee ballots and their validity have been controversial points for some time in Russia. Currently, under Russian law, voters can pick up absentee ballots from their local voting precincts. So long as they provide the location of their voting precinct, a valid ID number from their passport, and a current address, they could use these ballots up to the date of the election. There have been several incidences of fraud and intimidation with the use of the absentee ballot. For example, during the 2007 Duma elections, employees complained that they were pressured to register as absentee voters and then vote in the presence of their employer. Some employers reportedly threatened to take photos of ballots if they did not show the “correct” voting choice – a chilling remainder of social control from Soviet Russia, if true. In addition, some voters have said that they were paid to grab an unfilled absentee ballot, give that ballot to another voter, and fill it out the ballot the other voter gave them. This is what’s called the “streamlet” method in which voters could repeatedly vote in the same or multiple

1 See write-up on opposition “victory” in Sept. 8 Moscow mayor’s poll. Shuster, Simon. “Russia’s Elections: Even in Defeat, Anti-Putin Camp Finds Victory,” Time, September 9, 2013. Available at http://world.time.com/2013/09/09/russias-elections-even-in-defeat-anti-putin-camp-finds-victory/ - accessed online on January 10, 2013. 2 For further details about Navalny challenge, please look at http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130912/183382358/Navalny-Submits-Lawsuit-to-Annul-Moscow-Election-Results.html - accessed on January 10, 2013.

locations so long as they pledged to vote for a certain party. Several sources have said this practice has become routine by offenders in the most recent elections and likely will remain as a means of manipulating the vote.

These instances of voter fraud cast a worrying pall because of the systemic manipulation of the polls that further erode any semblance of propriety in Russian elections. A number of simple reforms could be undertaken to improve the absentee ballot process and bolster the validity of the vote in Russia. One reform would involve better record keeping and quality control of voter lists. Russia was an early pioneer in computer technology in the voting process with the Ras Gybori system, an electronic network designed for the Central Election Commission to monitor election data, assist in maintaining voter lists, provision of information about candidates and parties. The Central Election Commission should commission an independent panel of experts (including political analysts, activists from all parties, and election experts) to study security flaws with the current system and ways of improving the data collection and information assurance of voter lists. Their study should be uninterrupted by political interference, and also given broad room to rigorously examine the issues and publish their findings by the end of 2015. The Duma should then act on these findings in the form of transparent, definitive legislation. This reform would go a long way in securing the vote, raising confidence in the voting process, and setting an example of determined self-introspection and improvement in a state controversially known as a pioneer in vote manipulation and intimidation.

Another reform would be removing the option of voters to manually write in their voting precinct information on the absentee ballot. The current system seems at once extraneous and open for abuse because 1) physical records of voting lists and their electronic component should inform correct identification of voting precincts for voters and election authorities already and 2) the responsibility to self-report the correct voting precinct seems unlikely to be satisfied given the low turnouts in local and municipal elections and the limited amount of information voters generally have about elections themselves. If precinct information is already collected and verified from voter lists, then they should be pre-printed on the ballots so as to remove any confusion for the voters and eliminate most fraud. For example, during the 2011 parliamentary elections a CEC member said that more 1,700,000 absentee ballots had been handed out to voters, yet only 1,260,000 of these ballots were cast.3 It can only be speculated what happened to the close than 500,000 votes outstanding here, but it is reasonable that some level of fraud along the lines of what has been previously mentioned occurred. Better coordination of the electronic systems holding voter information and security changes to the ballot can bolster the integrity of the ballot for 2016.

Finally, harassment, discrimination and intimidation in places of work and school continue to be of immense concern with regards to voting. During the 2011 parliamentary

3 “Russian election commission to probe absentee ballot mess,” RIA Novosti, http://en.ria.ru/society/20111209/169506919.html - accessed online January 10, 2013

elections and the 2012 presidential election, some voters complained of intimidation and harassment by employers and university officials. They were allegedly threatened with dismissal from jobs or expulsion from university if they didn’t vote for a certain candidate. Under both the Russian constitution and the 2002 Labor Code, discrimination is explicitly prohibited. For example, Article 3 of the Labor Code prohibits discrimination on the grounds of race, gender, religious belief, nationality, language, social origin, property status, place of residence, affiliations with social associations and other circumstances not related to professional status. However, there is no specific Russian legislation when it comes to discrimination, voting and places of worship, work and school. This loophole in the law leaves a broad interpretation for employers and university administrators to harass their students and employees in the most sacred franchise. These abuses could be curtailed if legislation addressing both discrimination and harassment of voters in places of work, study and worship could be passed. Article 19 of the Russian Constitution contains most of the legal authority for legislation to eliminate voter discrimination in these places. Legislators in Russia should look to punish individuals and employers with heavy fines and significant jail time if they harass, intimidate or discriminate against employees and students in voting. Also, the Central Election Commission must urgently reform their claims and disputes resolution in this regard. According to an OSCE report of the 2011 elections, they found that the CEC was “not transparent and in resolving complaints and did not afford complainants the right to an effective or timely remedy.” This matter should be addressed further with legislation as well, and if necessary, changes in the leadership and structure of the commission.