Ukrainian presidential election’ 2014 Issue 2. April-1, 2014/Civic.UA
Electoral orientations of Ukrainian citizens
According sociological research, made by "Razumkov Centre" and Sociological Group "Rating", 85.4% of respondents with varying degrees of confidence replied that they are going to participate in the early presidential elections (62.2% quite sure, 23.2% of correspondents are likely going to take part). If elections were held in the coming days, 28.2% of respondents (or 42.3% of those who are going to participate in elections and have decided for whom to vote) intend to vote for P.Poroshenko. For Tymoshenko - 13.0% and 19.1%, for S.Tigipko - 6.1% and 8.8%, for O.Bohomolec - 3.7% and 5.5%, for O.Lyashko - 3.7% and 5.5%, for M.Dobkin - 3.6% and 5.2%, for P.Symonenko - 3.2% and 4.6%, for A.Grytsenko - 3.0% and 4.3%, for O.Tiahnybok - 1.6% and 2.3%, for D.Yarosh - 1.2% and 1.9%, for R.Kuzmin - 0.2% and 0.3%, for V.Rabynovych - 0.1% and 0.2%. Research was conducted by "Razumkov Centre" and Sociological Group "Rating" from March 28 to April 2, 2014. 3011 respondents were interviewed. More details here.
Violators and falsifications should not become members of elections commissions on elections of the President of Ukraine
Taking into account results of observation over election campaigns of the past 5 years CVU has established a list of persons, whose actions or inactivity caused violations of election legislation or may be qualified as dishonest conduct during elections.
However, at previous election campaigns CVU repeatedly registered acts (or inactivity) of different level election commissions' members that led to serious violations, abuses and distortion of the will of citizens of Ukraine. Absolute majority of such facts was never investigated, and violators were not brought to justice. Early Presidential elections will be held in Ukraine on May 25th. Correspondence of these elections to international standards is a task of paramount importance for Ukrainian authorities and public. Fair and transparent elections of future elections of the head of state will confirm inevitability of democratic changes in the new Ukraine. Committee of voters of Ukraine hopes that activities of violators at previous elections will become subject of an unbiased investigation of law enforcement bodies. Not waiting for results of such investigations CVU calls headquarters of candidates in president of Ukraine not to cooperate on May 25thelections with election commission members who have no trust of Ukrainian citizens.
The following is qualified as violation of election legislation by commission member: membership in election commission which committed systematic violations or single major violation of the constitution, legislation); systematic failure of election commission member to fulfill his obligations; single major violation of election legislation (campaigning, destroying ballot papers, giving out ballot papers without good reason, making unreasonable changes in the ballot papers with a stamp “Withdraw”, unsealing envelopes with election documents in the process of transportation; commitment of crimes, qualified by articles 212-7 – 212-20 of the Code of Ukraine on administrative violations (in case of corresponding court decision); commitment of crimes, qualified by articles 157 159-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (in case of guilty verdict of court). According to this methodology, the following is qualified as dishonest conduct of election commission member: commit or omit to do acts, which are not referred as violations of election legislation by election legislation, but do not contribute to preparation and conduction of elections according to international standards (causing delay of vote tabulation at polling station, improper fulfillment of election commission member obligations etc). Committee of voters of Ukraine calls candidates to President of Ukraine to examine carefully the list of mentioned above persons and not to include them to election commissions at early Presidential elections. More information on the Civic Space Portal
CVU has established a list of persons, whose actions or inactivity caused violations of election legislation or may be qualified as dishonest conduct during elections
Income declarations of presidential candidates: first transparency test The Central Election Commission has completed the registration of candidates for the post of President of Ukraine. This time 23 candidate will compete for the highest post in Ukraine. Among the applicants there are 7 official millionaires and two temporarily unemployed. The youngest candidate is Natalia Korolevksa. The oldest one is Petro Symonenko, who is running for presidential post for the fourth time. However, the reliability and transparency of income and property of some candidates may raise doubts.
The youngest candidate for this year's elections is 38 year-old former Minister of Social Policy Natalia Korolevska. Comparing with previous presidential elections, the current Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who declined to run this year, was the youngest candidate in 2010. 61 year-old leader of the Communist Party of Ukraine Petro Symonenko is the oldest candidate and is running for the presidency for the fourth time. On the other hand, it will be the second presidential elections for Oleh Tiahnybok, Yulia Tymoshenko, Serhiy Tihipko and Anatoliy Hrytsenko. According to published income declarations for 2013, there are six official millionaires among presidential candidates: Oleh Tihipko (263,579,662 grn.), Petro Poroshenko (51,837,681 grn.), Mykhailo Dobkin (21,095,921 grn.), Olga Bohomolets (3,311,440 grn.), Renat Kuzmin (1,312,070 grn.) and Vadym Rabinovych (1,000,000 grn.). On the other hand, both the leader of the party "Right Sector" Dmytro Yarosh and former member of the Kyiv City Council Zorian
The election campaign for extraordinary elections of the President of Ukraine will be the shortest in the last 23 years, and the registered candidates are already under the close oversight of the wide public. One of the first tests for openness and transparency of the candidates is publishing income declarations. According to Art. 50 of the Law of Ukraine "On the Election of the President of Ukraine", during the registration each candidate must submit a declaration of assets, incomes, expenditures and financial commitments, both personal and of their family members in the previous year
Shkiriak were temporarily unemployed and have not earned a penny during 2013. Despite such incomes, both candidates were able to pay an obligatory bail in the amount of 2.5 million grn. to the Central Election Commission. However, the source of funds for the bail may raise doubts among potential voters. The presidential candidates also declared real estate that is owned, rented or in usage by them and members of their families. Among 23 candidates Olha Bohomolets declared the biggest amount of such property, namely 2 houses, 7 apartments and other premises with total area of 5134 m2. Next goes the member of the Party of Regions and self-proclaimed candidate Oleh Tsarov, who declared 1 residential house, 1 summer house and 7 apartments. The other interesting position is a declaration of vehicles that is owned, rented or in usage by presidential candidates and members of their families. With this regard, a self-nominated nonparty candidate V. Saranov is an absolute leader, while declaring 8 cars and a boat. Next are Serhiy Tihipko and M.Dobkin with 6 declared cars. More information
Ukraine’s May Presidential Election and the Politics of East and West
Ukraine’s Central Election Commission has officially registered 23 presidential candidates for the elections scheduled to take place on 25 May 2014 – though the registration deadline was just extended to 7 April. Only 7 have registered as party nominees, whilst the remaining 16 are self-nominated, although many belong formally or informally to political parties. As of 26 March, reputable polls indicated that Ukraine’s ‘Chocolate King’, Petro Poroshenko, was leading at 24.9 percent. Other frontrunners were Vitaliy Klitschko, Yuliya Tymoshenko and Serhiy Tihipko at 8.9, 8.2 and 7.3 percent respectively. Klitschko recently withdrew his candidacy in support of Poroshenko, and a more recent poll on 2 April showed that Poroshenko’s ratings have since soared to 38.3 percent. Although Tihipko is a senior member of Viktor Yanukovych’s former political party, the Party of Regions (PoR), he is standing as an independent. The only official candidate endorsed by the PoR is Mikhail Dobkin, who was trailing far behind at 4.2 percent in the 26 March polls, and his ratings have since fallen back even further, whilst Tihipko has made significant gains, and is now polling at 17.9 percent. In spite of the Euromaidan movement and the fall of Yanukovych’s regime, which promised change in the rules of the game, the frontrunners are once again "the usual suspects". Most are either present or former oligarchs, or are supported by them. Poroshenko and Tymoshenko stood for change during the Orange Revolution in 2004, but largely failed to deliver. Tihipko also presented himself as an alternative candidate during the 2010 presidential election when he came third, only a short time later to merge into the PoR structure. None of the new Ukrainian Nationalist parties and (in)famous activists of the Euromaidan movement, such as the leader of the Right Sector, Dmytro Yarosh, or the leader of the nationalist Svoboda party, Oleh Tyahnybok, have yet made any real impression in the polls. Similarly, supporters of the anti-Maidan movement, such as Dobkin, a patron of the radical pro-Russian All-Ukrainian Front, and Petro Symonenko, leader of the Communist Party of Ukraine, are far behind in the running. Given the most recent developments in Ukraine and the confrontation with Russia, the underlying EastWest question once again dominates the contest. Although the issue has been manipulated as a political tool in the past, an East-West divide has been a salient feature of electoral politics since Ukraine’s independence in 1991. Support for closer links with Russia or closer EU integration is of course regionally skewed, even if it is a simplification to say that the Ukrainian west always favours the West and the east always looks to Russia. Under Yanukovych’s presidency (2010-2014), the government cemented the country’s neutral status, preventing it from seeking membership in NATO. In the current crisis, Russia has pressed the international community to ensure Ukraine’s sustained political and military neutrality. Nonetheless, Ukraine’s current interim government, led by Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, signed the key elements of the Association Agreement with the EU on 21 March and is adamant on progressing with the economic part in the near future. Although the interim government has thus far rejected claims that it is seeking to join NATO,
insecurity amidst the confrontation with Russia has brought the debate to the fore. On the basis of such polls, and provided the elections are held as scheduled with no major disruptions (which is a huge "if"), Poroshenko would be expected to win. Poroshenko owns one of the largest confectionary businesses in Ukraine, ‘Roshen’. He was the leader of the "Solidarity" political party that merged into Tymoshenko’s Fatherland party in March 2013. However, Poroshenko and Klitschko’s support is concentrated in the centre and west, which coincides with Tymoshenko’s traditional stronghold. They have some support in the ‘soft’ south-east, but very little in the Donbass or Kharkiv. Poroshenko is not the Kremlin’s ideal candidate. He is unequivocally pro-EU and has recentlydeclared that Ukraine could become a member of the EU in 2025 – whereas Russia recently proposed to the US to enshrine Ukraine’s neutral political and military status in the new constitution a way out of the crisis. Moreover, the relationship between Poroshenko and the Kremlin since last July has been quite tense. Wielding a “stick” against Ukraine’s pro-western oligarchs, Russia imposed trade sanctions against ‘Roshen’ in August/September 2013, resulting in substantial losses for the business. More recently, the Kremlintargeted Poroshenko’s assets in the city of Lipetsk, Russia.
Despite numerous assertions by some of Ukraine’s political elites that Tymoshenko is a ‘politician of the past’ who stands no chance of winning, she still represents a formidable force. Tymoshenko’s control over "administrative resources" is currently one of the strongest. Most key governmental positions in central government, such as acting President, Chair of Parliament, Ministry of Interior, Presidential Administration are held by people who are closely associated with Tymoshenko. In the regions, Tymoshenko also has the upper hand,reportedly controlling at least nine governorships. In her most recent press conference, she declared that she possesses unique experience as a victim of political injustice following her imprisonment from 2011 to 2014, and knows better than anyone else how to fight the "old rules" set up by the oligarchs, though her rhetoric was similar in 2004 and 2010. Tymoshenko is more firmly pro-EU and has called Putin ‘enemy number one’ of Ukraine. However, it was Tymoshenko who signed the 2009 gas agreement with Russia, making Ukraine pay a much higher price. Read more
Socio-political expectations: April 2014 According to results of research conducted by Sociological group "RATING, the majority of respondents said that first of all it is necessary to carry out reforms on fight against corruption (63%) and in economy (61%). According to 42% of respondents the reforms also need the army and defense and ensuring the territorial integrity of Ukraine (33%). 35% of respondents expect reforms in health care, 30% in the social protection of the population, 28 % - in industry, 25% - in agriculture, 21% - in the police. Among the main criteria by which lustration in Ukraine has to be carried out, more than a half of respondents (54%) calledparticipation in corruption schemes (54%). Much less (10%) noted that participation of the person in political corruption, change of political orientation, 7% - participation in a certain ideology which, in their opinion, can harm to the country, 6% - participation in human rights violation during recent protest actions has to be the main criterion of lustration. At the same time 10% of respondents spoke against carrying out lustration because it destabilizes a situation in the country even more. 12% - could not decide.
all regions of the country. 12% - don't support this idea. A quarter weren’t defined.
The majority of respondents (64%) support the idea of creation the coalition government which representatives of all leading political forces from should be submitted but when society will reach a compromise. At the same time, 44 % of respondents do not support Ukraine's membership in NATO.
About 40% of respondents clearly support the arrival of new leaders to politics, including by participation in elections to Verkhovna Rada and the President. A third more is rather for, than against. Thus respondents support possible participation of new leaders in parliamentary elections slightly more, than in the presidential. Only about 10% of respondents don't support idea. Every sixth didn't decide on the relation to this question.
The major criterion at the choice of the candidate for whom will vote on elections, a half of respondents (51%) noted spotless corruption reputation. 40% of voters placed emphasis on personal qualities of the politician, 31% - on the political program of the candidate, 28% - on existence of an unchangeable, consecutive political position.
More detailed
38% of Ukrainians consider that the Agreement on association with EU and a free trade zone has to be signed as soon as possible. Most of all supporters of immediate signing of the agreement is in the West (70%). 21% of respondents see the advisability of signing an association agreement with the EU, when Ukraine will be ready for it . At the same time , 31% of respondents do not support the signing of the Agreement with the EU. The speedy application for NATO membership expressed 28% of respondents. 14% believe that the application for NATO membership should be submitted but when society will reach a compromise . At the same time, 44 % of respondents do not support Ukraine's membership in NATO. As for the Customs Union, the fastest introduction is supported by 15% of the population of Ukraine. The fact that the Customs Union is necessary to enter, but when the society is achieved compromise announced another 16% of respondents. At the same time the majority (55%) do not support Ukraine's accession to the Customs Union.
Money for a Presidential Candidate
The winter revolution of 2013-2014 creates a basis for new traditions of political life. This partially concerns the voters’ attention to the phase of vesting candidates with the power of decision-making on their behalf. The current electoral race is somewhat shadowed by rapid post-revolutionary events, which mirror huge problems unsolved over 22 years of Ukraine’s independence. In view of the fact that eastern Ukrainian regions support separatism, it is unclear whether the electoral process will end in the vote on 25 May but it goes on. Like never before, much attention at these presidential elections will be given to transparency of funds deposited for candidates’ registration, not to candidates (most of whom are known for “the results of their work”) or their programs (more or less adequate to the needs of Ukraine’s development after the winter revolutionary events of 2013-2014). UAH 2,500,000 (about $215,000) is not such a small amount to be disinterested in the sources of its origin. Meanwhile, the law on the elections of the President of Ukraine says nothing about the declaration of origin of monetary deposit attributing these funds to the nonelectoral process. Nevertheless, there is a need to ensure transparency of these funds and to reconsider approaches to conditions and means for the preliminary selection of nominees for registration. Unusually large amount of electoral deposit is Ukraine’s specificity It has to be mentioned that in European countries, the institution of electoral deposit at presidential elections does not play such a unique role as in Ukraine. In general, in many EU states, either parliamentary republics or mixed (semi-presidential) democracies, the President is elected by the parliament. Direct presidential elections are carried out in 12 out of 28 EU states: Austria, Bulgaria, Lithuania,Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Cyprus, Poland, Portugal, Finland, France, and Czechia (where the first direct presidential elections have been held in 2013, whereas earlier on, the President was elected by the parliament). None of the above countries used electoral deposit in such a high amount as Ukraine or use no electoral deposit at all, even if the matter concerns countries comparable to Ukraine in terms of the number of voters – Poland (30.7 million) and France (46.5 million). In Ukraine, the number of voters registered for the 2014 elections is about 35.5 million. In Poland, electoral deposit is not used at all. Candidates are required to register with 1,000 signatures of voters in support and after that submit 100,000 signatures. There were only 12 and 10 presidential candidates in Poland in 2005 and 2010 respectively. In France, electoral deposit for presidential candidates constitutes some €2,000 but it is not their key objective. In order to be eligible to stand for elections, candidates should submit to the Constitutional Council (a body analogous to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine that oversees the conduct of elections and considers complaints) a proposal for the support (in the form of signatures) of a minimum of 500 elected officials. Elected officials eligible to propose a candidate are members of parliament, members of
the Paris council, members of local government assemblies (analogues of Ukrainian local councils), and mayors. Each elected official can support only one candidate. Geographically, these signatures should represent 1/3 of administrative and territorial units of France (at least, 30 out of 101 departments and overseas authorities). Not later than 8 days before the voting, the Council publishes a list of 500 names of proposing elected officials for each candidate. This simple, at the first sight, signature collection mechanism contributes to the preliminary selection of candidates and serves as a kind of recommendation from officials already vested with the trust of the voters. Together with other factors, its effect is rather strong: 12 presidential candidates were registered for the 2007 elections and 10 candidates ran for the President in the 2012 campaign. Despite the relatively small number of officials ready “to support” candidates, the collection of their signatures is not easy. Many parties do not allow their members to support candidates of other parties. Also, there are restrictions on the support to candidates of radical parties. In fact, candidate of the Front National Party Marine Le Pen faced certain problems in the collection of signatures in 2012. Her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, also experienced problems at that stage and, as a result, failed in 1981. In Ukraine, electoral deposit is viewed as an exclusive proof of “serious intentions” of candidates. Yet, even its huge amount does not prevent some bold politicians from fighting for presidency or using votes given in favor of other candidates for “technical support”. The unprecedented growth of the amount of electoral deposit has occurred before the 2010 presidential elections. Earlier on, at the presidential elections of 1991, 1994, and 1999, a candidate was registered if he/she collected not less than 100,000 signatures and 1,000,000 signatures in 1999. In 2004, acandidate had to collect signatures of 500,000 voters and make electoral deposit equivalent to UAH 500,000 (about $100,000 at that time). Now, electoral deposit amounts to UAH 2,500,000, which is 2.5 times higher than the previous threshold and does not correspond to the average income of the population. Electoral deposit for presidential candidates in Ukraine is 675 times higher compared to the average industrial wage (UAH 3,700 as of January 2014 according to data of the State Statistics Committee of Ukraine). Even the notorious decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine of 30 January, 2002 on the electoral deposit (No. 2-рп/2002) has stated that the amount of monetary deposit should be determined depending on financial capacity of the overwhelming majority of the population. More here. Electoral deposit has not been a “filter of the number of candidates”. As is shown in the table, the deposit’s introduction in 2004 only increased the number of presidential candidates. 18 persons ran for the President in 2010, whereas in 2014, 23 presidential nominees have been registered. This number is higher compared to the afore-mentioned countries. Whether these candidates are politically mature is a rhetoric question. More information
Contact information
Civic Space Center www.civicua.org euprostir.org.ua https://www.facebook.com/CivicUA On Portal "Civic Space" created a special section of the coverage of the presidential elections in 2014
Supported by NED