Сергій Васильченко (svasylchenko) wrote,
Сергій Васильченко

Ghost voters of the Golosiiv electoral forest

After the 2004 presidential election I talked to representatives of many organizations, presenting the project of conducting analysis of the electoral information on the every voting district (polling station, electoral precinct): the voter lists, turnout and voting results. Identifying inconsistencies and abnormal results would allow to select the most problematic precincts, which should have a special attention during the next elections, and will allow to develop mechanisms to prevent fraud in these very areas. But everyone was in euphoria after the "orange revolution" and my initiatives were not supported. Some people said to me that there would be court trials of some vote-riggers, and people would be afraid to rig the vote during the next elections. And the problems of the voter lists will be solved by the State Register of Voters. But 2006 elections to the councils of all levels dispelled all hopes for fairness.
Leadership of the most of political parties was hoping that powerful Party of Regions (PR) and Block of Yuliya Tymoshenko (BYuT) will be controlling each other and this will secure fairness of the vote count, and refused to create a wide-branching network of observers. However, heads of local HQs, who had experience of previous campaigns, insisted on the need for total observation (surveillance). So results of the vote count had shocked the many - at the polling stations where observers from a given political party were present, results were accurate, and at the stations without observers, a political party would often get a zero.
I was told of situations, when a candidate from a given party was voting for his own party, together with his relatives, but the website of CEC showed no votes for his own political party in his own precinct. That is why it was the case at local elections, that party or block were getting less votes than number of candidates it had. Parliamentary political forces became the victims of this vote count as well - Natalia Vitrenko Block, Pora-PRP, Lytvyn Block, NDP, party Viche, block of Karmazin and others demanded to recount the ballots, but respective law in Verkhovna Rada did not gain enough votes of MPs. Though before the premature parliamentary elections of 2007, Lytvyn Block conducted recount of ballots, and its representatives said, that already after the recount, part of the stations established serious discrepancies with official data. But for some reason, the Block have not publicized the final recount results - but maybe this has allowed it to pass the electoral threshold. I have not participated in the work of local election commission, so did not observe directly the fraud during the vote count, but my own research made me doubtful about the quality of lists of voters.
Already after the last presidential elections of 2010, I have decided to review the information from 3 campaigns (2006, 2007, and 2010) by precincts (polling station areas) in Golosiiv district (raion) of Kyiv city. This rayon is very interesting for research, as it includes the blocks: of student dormitories, houses were university teachers and fellow of scientific institutes reside, there are residential areas of newer and old development periods, private houses (that were left after the inclusion of villages), and also built by the modern rich. Besides, in the process of my work, sponsors for analysis of this rayon showed up. At the first glance I thought that making electoral maps would be easy, as there are only 78 voting precincts. But when I started to outline the boundaries of the precincts on the map, problems emerged. The law regulates only the number of voters that should be included in the precinct area, but says nothing of the territory. I had a feeling that those who were distributing houses between the polling stations (precincts), was guided by some "cosmic" laws of space and area. Even residential buildings located in a row, for some reason were separated among different polling stations, instead of being included in the one precinct. Even more illogical is creation of precincts in areas of private houses. Actually the areas of precincts are intersecting each other, and you have to really inventive in order to outline with a solid contour the buildings which belong to one precinct, and to not intersect the other precincts.

Residential buildings that belong to different precincts have different color

Also some precincts have unreasonably extended territory.
But the biggest problem was in absence in my map of the buildings, that were included in the description of the precincts. Firstly, I thought that my map is obsolete, but later it was figured out that influence of the new buildings is small. To identify the buildings absent on my map, I used maps and satellite images available in the Internet, Information-analytical system of management of residential buildings of Kyiv city   and Search of postal codes . Thanks to these services, some interesting things were revealed. Thus, on the old maps there are alleys Balakireva (Балакірєва) and Gulaka-Artemovskogo (Гулака-Артемовського), but for already several years all buildings on these streets and adjacent buildings from other streets are demolished. It is clearly seen on the satellite image. Now, on these area, the construction goes on, and residential buildings that were located there previously, are excluded from the register of residential buildings, and from the database of postal codes. But this did not prevent to include demolished houses into the areas of different precincts for elections of 2006, 2007, 2010.

Besides the demolished houses, the houses that never existed become the part of precincts. Thus, the precinct No. 167 in 2006, 2007 (No. 58 in 2010) includes the houses 25 to 42 Burmistenka street, but this street has only 13 houses, and is located far away from that precinct. At earliest these houses appeared in description of precinct 58 in 2004, but if they were there before - I cannot tell, because there is no detailed description of precincts of 1998 or 2002 elections on CEC website. But there is a question - what was the sense of establishing State registry of voters, if the ghost buildings did not disappear from descriptions of precincts? And even bigger question - to the work of NGOs who are dealing with electoral monitoring - what their long-term observers were doing?

Tags: 2004, 2006, 2007, 2010, elections, register of voters, voters
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded