Preliminary Statement on Ukraine's Presidential Run-Off Election

November 14, 1999

Summary

The 22-member International Republican Institute (IRI) observation mission, led by former U.S. Attorney General and Pennsylvania Governor Dick Thornburgh, found Ukraine's presidential run-off election to be administratively and technically satisfactory amid a disappointing atmosphere of biased and controlled media and an overreaching use of the power of incumbency. However, the election did strengthen Ukraine's developing democratic tradition and presented a very clear choice to the Ukrainian people about the future direction of their country.

IRI's Observation

IRI had observed the October 31, 1999 presidential election, Ukraine's 1994 and 1998 parliamentary elections, as well as other elections within the country. For the presidential run-off, IRI deployed 10 observation teams to nine oblasts, all sites of IRI training missions over the last three years. The deployment oblasts were Cherkasy, Chernivtsi, Donetsk, Ivano-Frankivsk, Kharkiv, Odesa, Ternopil and the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Two teams remained in Kyiv to monitor voting in the capital city and environs and to observe the national counting process. In all, more than 100 polling sites were monitored.

Prior to election day, IRI delegates met with political and economic experts, U.S. Ambassador Steven Pifer, local election officials, and representatives of Ukrainian media, Ukrainian political parties, the Verkhovna Rada's ad-hoc committee to monitor the elections, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

IRI makes its final assessment of elections based on observing four phases: the pre-election phase, election day, the final count, and the post-election phase, when the people's will is implemented. Thus far, IRI has witnessed the first two, and part of the third, of these four phases. Consequently, IRI reserves the right to modify this preliminary statement based on new data or information yet to be collected.

Pre-Election Environment

IRI commented on the pre-election environment leading up to the October 31 balloting. (See IRI Preliminary Statement dated November 1, 1999). For the most part, similar comments can be made with respect to the period between the two elections.

The sudden resignation of three presidentially appointed officials from Poltava, Vinnytsya, and Kirovohrod was one of the most widely noted political developments during this pre-election period. The replacement of these governors contributed to an atmosphere of cynicism and accusations of manipulation because opposition candidates had prevailed in those oblasts in the October 31 election.

Numerous reports reached IRI observers about activities on "Parent's Day," Saturday, November 13 -- the day before the election. According to these reports, parents who visited their children's schools on Saturday were instructed by teachers and school officials to vote for the incumbent. Also, in composition exercises, teachers dictated material to their students about the importance of re-electing the incumbent. These reports of school-related pressures were widespread.

Many Ukrainians have described the incumbent as having a virtual television and radio monopoly. Almost without exception, IRI observers heard complaints about the media favoring the president, who received nothing but positive and frequent coverage, while his opponent received substantially less and generally negative coverage. As noted in IRI's previous report, a number of media outlets were the alleged targets of selective state investigation. Such tactics have a long-term effect.

In addition, foreign observers reported instances of meetings with media representatives who candidly admitted their bias. Their assertion was to the effect that this election was simply "too important to be neutral," lest the country go back to the days of communism. In Chernivtsi, for example, IRI observers were expressly told by a media representative that he supported the incumbent because he is the lesser of two evils.

Such blatant media bias raises concerns not only for this and future elections, but for freedom of the press as well. If Ukraine is to have an independent, objective free press, media need to correct such a one-sided approach.

The election law contains a 20-minute television "equal time" provision for candidates. Even so, the preponderance of time devoted to coverage of the incumbent was extraordinary. Were this requirement not to exist, in the current media climate in Ukraine, opposition candidates might not have any opportunity to appeal to voters on a nationwide basis.

This pre-election period included a major holiday -- the re-named Day of National Reconciliation -- that gave both candidates an opportunity to campaign publicly. However, relatively small crowds at both campaigns' rallies appeared to indicate some degree of voter fatigue with the campaign process.

Pre-election Administration

IRI believes the Central Election Commission (CEC) is to be commended for handling the dual requirements of finalizing and publishing results from the October 31 contest, while simultaneously preparing for the run-off. The CEC was able to print and distribute nationwide election ballots within a relatively short timeframe. IRI observers did not receive reports of inadequately supplied polling stations. Furthermore, election officials questioned by IRI observers said they were adequately trained and prepared for the run-off. The CEC also produced in a timely fashion the preliminary results in a district-by-district format.

During this pre-election period, the Verkhovna Rada has moved to further enhance the presidential election law. An example is passage of an amendment that would require the CEC to rotate officers among the commission members. It is important that the parliament be able to work cooperatively with the CEC on the basis of mutual confidence and trust.

Election Day -- Balloting, Counting and Administration

Notwithstanding earlier concerns about low voter turn-out, Ukrainian citizens voted in large numbers for the run-off. The continued presence of candidate pollwatchers was a positive aspect of this election. Further, despite some ambiguity in the law, there was no apparent confusion as to who would serve on local election commissions or as candidate pollwatchers.

In general, voters were able to cast ballots in an environment free of intimidation or fear. As during the October 31 election, uniformed militia members continued to be engaged in the balloting process instead of safeguarding it.

Communal voting continued, although it appears to be on the decline as a general practice. As was the case in the October 31 balloting, the election officials were dedicated, knowledgeable and efficient in carrying out their duties.

Ukraine was the first of the former Soviet republics to have a peaceful transfer of presidential power through an election of its citizenry. This proud legacy was extended during the 1998 parliamentary and local elections. Nonetheless, this election, with its attendant problems, could represent an extension of worrisome trends as well. It is our hope that Ukraine's leadership, as it embarks on a new five-year term, will address these shortcomings while providing responsive government, true economic reform and a consistent commitment to democratic principles.

###

A nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing democracy worldwide