A huge number of violations when voting for the deputies of the State Duma and the President questioned the legitimacy of the current government. Another confirmation of this was the newly published study “Crime without punishment”. The New Times studied the arguments of the authors
Distrust is postponed in public consciousness and makes itself felt. With the beginning of the crisis, the ratings of the approval of the activities of Dmitry Medvedev, Vladimir Putin and parliament went down. Even according to the state VTsIOM, from the beginning of autumn to early February, the president and the Duma lost 10%, the prime minister - 7%. Independent sociologists predict minus 10-15%by summer. The very name of the study “Crime without punishment”, which was published by the Center for Political Consulting “Niccolo M” and the Panorama Center, contains a sad Water, to which the authors, candidates of legal sciences Andrei Buzin and Arkady Lubarev came. They not only collected the amount of evidence of the illegality of the election of deputies of the fifth State Duma and the Third President of Russia, but also presented mathematical confirmations of falsifications. True, the domestic femid does not believe in mathematics or the evidence of mass violations. Recall that on October 8 last year, the Supreme Court finally refused the Communist Party of the Communist Party of the claim for the abolition of elections to the Duma of the fifth convocation. Five main violations in the study show the features of the will in Russian, which are contrary to fundamental democratic principles. Firstly, this is participation in the elections of officials of all levels without interruption from production. A mockery of democracy is already the inclusion of the voting list from United Russia 65 out of 85 chapters of the regions, headed by the current president. Secondly, campaigning for the “right” candidates by the forces dominant in the information (primarily in the television) space of state media. According to the results of monitoring, conducted by the Voice Association, during the presidential campaign, the federal media mentioned Dmitry Medvedev twice as often than other candidates. In the Duma elections, the same two-time advantage of the ER over competitors was recorded by Transpenseri International and Kommersant-Vlast. Thirdly, the “help” to the voter by the employees paid from the budget, starting from police officers (even the Supreme Court recognized the illegality of the seizure of a quarter of agitation materials of the ATP) and ending with librarians: on the hot line of the Russian Free Elections, the following messages were appeared: “... the head of the library No. 14 of the Nevsky district of St. Petersburg is borced Lists of residents with addresses and phone numbers ”,“ Director of school No. 78 of the Kalinin district, ordered parents to take absenteeism and vote only at school ”. Fourth, the use of budget money to increase the appearance. The elections were called with the help of metro tickets and receipts for housing and communal services, concerts and sales, lotteries. The lottery ticket issued on the polling station Pyatigorsk with the slogan "Medved D.A." is indicative Fifthly, state control of the election commission, although by law an interference in their activities is not allowed. It got to the point that on the eve of March 2, one of the CEC members “due to illness” was replaced by an employee of the presidential administration, deputy head of the headquarters of EP Leonid Ivlev. In the regions went even further. For example, in the Poretsky district of Chuvashia, 28 out of 29 beatings were headed by representatives of the "bears". One The officials campaigned and indivisiblely campaigned from above to bottom: from Putin, who repeatedly publicly supported the EP (for example, during a direct line on October 18, 2007) and Medvedev (at a press conference on February 14, 2008), to the heads of municipalities. Hundreds came to the hotline of the Hot Line like: “The head of the Kreblyn district of the Ryazan region gathered the heads of settlements and said that 90% of the vote should be cast for the EP, and if someone will be aged for other parties, then he needs to signal.” The illegality of some of these cases was recognized even by the CEC. So, President of the Republic of Mari El Leonid Markelov managed to call to vote for Medvedev right on March 2, on election day, when agitation is prohibited by law. However, in the vast majority of cases, the CEC in response to indignant appeals recognized the statements of officials in favor of EP and P The reemnik is not agitation, but "an expression of opinion on the current political situation." “Executive power,” the study says, “represents the backbone of the dominant political corporation, which plays in the elections at once - the organizer, the direct participant and the judge.” This contradicts the principles of elective democracy. You did not stand by no less good reason to question the results of voting are strange fluctuations in the number of voters. On the authors given by the authors, a sharp, more than 1 million people, an increase in the number of voters on the day of voting for deputies and “disappearance” of almost 2 million citizens on the presidential election day, can clearly be seen. No demographic reasons cannot explain such a scatter. The authors claim that before the Duma elections, the turnout was artificially increased to increase the result of the EP, and reduced to the presidential, getting rid of "dead souls". At the same time, in some regions of voters there were less than 8.5% (for example, in the native to Medvedev Petersburg). The official commentary of the Central Election Commission emphasizes that “the fact of the quality of work on clarifying the voter lists may be the fact of a reduction of almost 2 times the number of voters included in the lists in addition to the voting day of March 2, compared with the elections of State Duma deputies.” True, the same fact can talk about something else: a significant part of those who voted for party lists made up “dead souls”. Wherever the main Buzin and Lubarev was saved for the last chapter, which mathematicians can enjoy. For the initiates, it is enough to say that the experts used the "Sobyanin-Sukhovolsky method." These scientists still found in the first half of the 90s: if, if the number of votes increases, the number of votes grows in favor of only one candidate or party, this is a result of falsifications. According to this theory, in an honest election, an increase in turnout should not lead to more than 10 percent growth of the result of one of the parties or one candidate. After a series of complex calculations, it turns out that in the 2003 parliamentary campaign “United Russia” went beyond the norm in 15 regions out of 35 regions selected for analysis, and in 2007, already at 31 out of 35. When voting at Medvedev, the same anomaly was detected in 27 out of 35 subjects of the Federation. “In the federal elections of 2007-2008, the impact of the administrative resource up to direct falsifications has significantly increased,” the authors conclude. By stating violations of the democratic procedure, the authors admit that if today to conduct the highest election campaign, they will win it, albeit with a different score, all the same EP and Medvedev. They will win, if only because they represent Vladimir Putin, in which the majority of the population continues to believe. The question is: why then were falsifications needed? Or were they needed?
