27 October 2011 in Donetsk was held public debate on theme “What kind of election law needs Ukraine?” with approximately 130 participants. The object of the event was to discuss advantages and possible shortcomings that may appear from the key issues of the bill “On Elections of the People’s Deputies of Ukraine”, in particular – electoral system, forming electoral districts and election commissions (precinct and district). In debates participated: People’s VR deputy, Chairman of the subcommittee on election legislation and civic associations S.P. Podhornyi; People’s VR deputy O.R. Kasianiuk; Deputy Head of the Donetsk office of the Party of Regions S.V. Bohachev; Candidate of law sciences, Associate professor of Constitutional and international law in Donetsk National University O.H. Turchynko; Development director of the international NGO “Internews Ukraine” Ye.V. Radchenko; representative of the Consortium of Election Initiatives O. Chernenko and other respected officials and local authorities, political parties, NGOs and mass media, election commission members, election experts.

A special feature of this event was SMS poll. According to it, a majority of respondents which support the use of proportional electoral system with open lists deem that parliament parties/factions should be first for substitution of precinct and district election commission members, and that electoral districts must be formed in advance.

The first part of debates was devoted to discussion of electoral system chosen by the President of Ukraine and activity of the Working group under the President of Ukraine. There were also considered Opinions and comments of the Venice commission and OSCE concerning the bill “On Elections of the People’s Deputies of Ukraine”. Thus, a representative of the Consortium of Election Initiatives O. Chernenko noted: “Unfortunately, all positive benefits of the bill “vanished” after deputies considered it. Not everything said on the Working group was taken into consideration.” In his opinion, the biggest problem stressed by experts is electoral system, as long as it defines the accountability of individuals we choose. It means, that we must “dance” from it - talk about commission formation etc. Moreover, representatives of the Consortium are sure, that attempt of the government to thrust upon community “simple formula” is not that simple, because there was no vocational public debate. On the first meeting of the Working group was stated, that electoral system issue is already settled. The question is: by whom? Since most of the parties were against this system. Although the Venice Commission stressed that this is country's internal affairs after analyzing the bill, it pointed out negative experience in usage of mixed electoral system in Ukraine (it causes political corruption), and at the absence of public discussions. In general, that was diplomatic comment from the Venice Commission. Open regional lists, according to O. Chernenko, is something that we must be aimed at. “We (the Consortium of Election Initiatives) will strive to the utmost and demand such election system” - affirmed the Head of the board of CVU.

VR deputy S.P. Podhornyi confidently states, that the bill proposed today “is a tank which will leave nothing behind”. The deputy says, that election system is important, but not the most important. Besides that, S.P. Podhornyi is convinced, that not only systems (majoritarian, proportional, mixed) are imperfect, but we are, and not only politicians – all citizens. Besides that, the politician gave an example of adoption or, to say more precise, ignoring a bill on open regional lists introduced by the VR deputy Yu.R. Miroshnychenko, when any author of the bill did not even report on it. So how could deputies vote for it? The politician is sure, “if voting machines will be turned on in the hall – there will be adopted the bill by Yefremov, in case they don’t alter their mind until 3 November.” "Committee hearings on 31 October, where will be present all representatives of NGOs and international experts, will show weather majority is going to take into consideration public and expert opinion. At the same time, the majority is convinced that this law shouldn’t be adopted. Therefore, the majority shouldn’t blame BYT and opposition, which refused to take part in this.” – said the politician. S.P.Podhornyi summarized his speech with the words: “It doesn’t matter which system will be chosen, but important are technologies that will ensure conduction of the election process.”

“What is the goal of this law?  - with this question started his speech the Deputy Head of the Donetsk office of the PR S.V. Bohachev – From my point of view, the law’s goal must be - to take into account the opinion of voters, choose professional parliament, and to protect interests of the state and territories.” Moreover, the politician is sure that the bill by Yefremov resolve the problem of regional commissions - 18 people is enough to secure work of precinct election commissions. “As for the election threshold (3% or 5%), the most important is to have professionals in the parliament: economists, jurists, financiers.” – says S.V.Bohachev. However, O. Chernenko assume, that today 5% threshold would overcome only three parties because of the situation in the country. Thus, 5% threshold is too high for Ukrainian realities. “3-4% would be best for Ukraine.” – states the expert. People’s deputy S.P. Podhornyi supported this point of view. Moreover, the deputy is convinced, that “The bill by Yefremov is a pure falsification, a little less one – is the bill by Lavrynovych, and the bill by Kliuchkovskyi will prevent falsification on the elections.”

During the second part of debates were discussed principled of forming election commissions, districts, and election systems already used in Ukraine. Development director of the international NGO “Internews Ukraine” Ye.V. Radchenko and the leader of analytical programs of the Donetsk Regional NGO "Committee of Voters of Ukraine" O.Kliuzhev made a detailed review of bills registered in VR (bills No.9265, No.9265-1, No.9265-2, and No.9265-3). Both experts paid special attention to the consideration of the bill No. 9265-1 (by Yefremov). At the end of law review Ye. Radchenko made following conclusions:

  • “under existing conditions, election districts can’t be formed outside the frames of electoral process, and if they can, there must be provided a possibility to appeal against their formation";
  • “division of election districts must be determined by the law, in particular, by the law “On elections”;
  • “increasing duration of the election process”;
  • “parallel development of the law “On the territorial organization of the election”

“The absence of these things – says Ye.Radchenko, - may lead to the abuse of the concept “election geography” when forming electoral districts." The expert is convinced, that “method that is offered by authors of the bill is too liberal and has little criteria for avoiding violations concerning opposition political parties when forming electoral districts."

Recordings of debates in Donetsk you can find in the blog “How do we choose the Verkhovna Rada?”