Reason to doubt

The official results will be known December 7-8, but the outcome of Russia’s December 2 elections for the Duma, the lower Chamber of the Parliament, are those of a real and true plebiscite for Putin and for his “United Russia” party which gained over 61% of the votes. The situation was different for Garry Kasparov, leader of the ‘Other Russia’ opposition movement which spoke of the “funerals of democracy” and for the 70 observers (MEPs from 28 Countries) of the Council of Europe and the OECD for whom “elections were held in an impartial environment”. AN “UNCORRECT VOTE”. The observers delegation was led by LUC VAN DEN BRANDE , from the CoE Parliamentary Assembly and by GÖRAN LENNMARKER , OECD member. “Elections were well conducted”, said the responsibles of the mission in Strasbourg on December 3. “However the ballot was held in an atmosphere which seriously restrained political competition, there was frequent mismanagement of administrative resources and media coverage was mainly in favour of the party in power”. Observers’ criticism focused on the following points: “commingling a State and a political party is an abuse of power and a clear violation of international standards and commitments”; the media displayed evident preference for President Putin and the party in power, “United Russia”; “due to the new electoral system, the new and the smaller parties can hardly progress and compete”. Finally, “various reports refer of harassment against opposition parties”. PARTIAL MEDIA. According to the observers, state authorities didn’t have a “neutral position”. “The extensive resort to administrative resources such as the use of statal infrastructures and of the staff enrolled in the public register in favour of United Russia” is “a clear violation” of European democratic standards. Furthermore, “most governors” were in the electoral roll of United Russia: “This is misleading for electors since it is very unlikely that these officials would leave their posts for a seat in the Duma”. “The active role played by the head of State in favour of United Russia even though he is not a member of the party, transformed parliamentary elections in a referendum for the President”. CoE and OECD criticism is focused on Russia’s information system: “the media, television in particular, are probably totally under State control”, remarked international observers. “During the campaign President Putin and Russia United made sure to have full media coverage”. In this way, “State-sponsored media didn’t respect the public mandate to offer an objective platform. This prevented and impartial overview of the political parties.” Observers claimed that the press was “more dynamic” than television and “there have been examples of well-balanced media coverage throughout the press. Newspapers however don’t reach out to the public at large”. Among the identified problems figures also the fact that “a 7% threshold and the prohibition for parties for form electoral coalitions has in fact contained “the creation of new political parties and thus also the possibility of a more pluralistic parliamentary representation”. The pre-electoral campaign was also marked by “repressive measures by the authorities against demonstrators and members of the opposition”. Several NGOs “encountered problems in implementing their work and referred they could not access the electoral offices on the voting day”. A RECOVERED RUSSIA. As relates to future political scenarios until the day of presidential elections (March 2008), SARA BARBIERI, member of the Balkan and Centre-Eastern Europe Institute, said: “election results will certainly affect presidential elections but I think that Putin will not insist with the Constitutional Reform: in the short-run Russia won’t progress into a form of authoritarianism as happened in Belarus with Lukascenko. Putin is aware that he can’t interrupt relations with European Chancelleries. After all, he already controls the political and economic nerve centres of the Country and could continue doing so even from a different institutional position. “He is certainly too young to disappear from the scene”, she affirmed. “In Russia power is personified: it’s always been this way, first with the tsars and then with the Communist leaders. Putin is the unquestioned leader and he represents “the certainties which the fall of Communism and Eltsin’s ruinous move tore down.” He “incarnates a recovered and strong Russia”, where “pensions are paid and where minor improvements are registered in every day life”.