Floating distance

The rules of the presidential election changed 15 times in the last 6 years, the experts of the Voice movement calculated

The Voice movement issued a report in which the key changes in the legislation on the election of the President of Russia in 2018 in comparison with the legal regulation of the 2012 presidential election. Voose experts calculated that over six years, amendments to the law on the presidential election were made 15 times, in total 59 of 87 articles and all four applications of this law were changed.

“In our opinion, the changes made did not have a single vector. The first change, made in May 2012, sharply reducing the number of voter signatures required for registration, was aimed at democratizing the elections. However, most of the changes made in 2012-2016 had the opposite orientation, ”the report says.

Among the toughenings, experts note the following: new restrictions on passive suffrage, additional restrictions in the registration of the candidate, restrictions on observation, reduce the terms of appeal of voting and election results were introduced. However, in 2017, the amendments vector changed again and became more democratic: ensuring the greatest opportunities for voting citizens, relieving observers.

“There is no objective reason to establish for candidates such different requirements for the number of voter signatures submitted for registration.” This contradicts the constitution and the rulings of the Constitutional Court

“The most radical change is the reduction in the number of required signatures,” the report says. At first, all candidates needed to collect at least one million signatures. Then this number increased to 2 million, while parliamentary parties were freed from the gathering. Now it is necessary to collect at times less: candidates from non -parliamentary 100 thousand, and to self -nominates - up to 300 thousand. At the same time, experts note, “there are no objective grounds for the candidates such different requirements for the number of voters submitted for registration,” and this contradicts the Constitution and the rulings of the Constitutional Court.

Another important novel is the restriction of passive suffrage. In 2012, citizens of Russia were indefinitely deprived of the rights to ever convicted of imprisonment for committing serious and (or) especially serious crimes. After the KS found it illegal, the norm was corrected: now the convicts are losing 10 and 15 years after the removal of criminal records in serious and especially serious crimes. But experts believe that the decision of the Constitutional Court was not completely implemented, especially to conditionally convicted. On this basis, Alexei Navalny is not allowed to the polls. As expressed in the special opinion of a member of the Constitutional Court of Konstantin Aranovsky, “conditional condemnation usually indicates a moderate degree of public danger of an act, even if a criminal law refers it to serious crimes. If the court decided that the act did not deserve real imprisonment and should be done with conditional condemnation, this reflects the severity of the character and degree of public danger, which directly follows from part 2 of article 73 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation ".

“We cannot categorically argue that the deprivation of passive suffrage of persons convicted of deprivation of freedom is conditionally does not comply with the Constitution of the Russian Federation. However, even if we assume that this norm corresponds to the constitution, we consider it anti -democratic, leading in practice to a significant reduction in election competitiveness, ”experts say.

Another undemocratic act, they consider the introduction of additional requirements and documents for registering a candidate. They can serve as another basis for refusal - as evidenced by the experience of the election of a lower level.

The rules of agitation, in particular, the use of images of a policy, and limits appeared at the price of propaganda products. Cutting the plots has changed - experts criticize their enlargement.

“These novels disrespectfully limited the capabilities of participants in the electoral process to appeal errors or conscious distortions of the results of the vote”

The transfer of elections from March 4 to 18 is political, and this has a serious flaw: “On the day of voting, festive events will certainly be held, during which the current president will be one of the main mentioned persons. At the same time, he will run for a new term, and in fact, on the voting day, actions will take place, which can be qualified as agitation for the candidacy of the current president. Thus, holiday events will give a reason for accusations and conflicts. ”

Experts are also criticized by how absenteeisms were replaced by a new voting mechanism at the location. This procedure has major drawbacks: voting according to new rules is more difficult to control, and it will become less accessible to many citizens.

Finally, the experts are unhappy with how the procedure for appealing the elections of the election has changed: for it they sharply reduced the deadlines. “These novels disrespectfully limited the capabilities of the electoral process participants to appeal errors or conscious distortions of the results of the vote. An analysis of the voting results usually requires time, and, as practice shows, serious distortions of voting results are often found outside the 10-day period, which is no longer possible to fix, even if all participants in the electoral process want this, ”summarizes the report.