About the observation in short
Within the monitoring campaign, OPORA attracts observers in every Ukrainian oblast to the conduction of long- and short-term observation during snap Presidential election, interim Parliamentary elections (district #83), and special local elections. In 2014, the course of election campaign from official start to the announcement of winners will be analyzed by 190 long-term observers. Two thousand of short-term observers will join them on the election day (in every round). Besides that, OPORA will deploy 500 short-term observers on 25thMay in Kyiv. On the basis of gathered data, OPORA will prepare interim reports on commission activities, nomination of candidates, campaigning, the use of administrative resource, vote count etc. Besides that, the organization will publish results of sample-based parallel vote tabulation (PVT or quick count), which is representative and has small margin of error, in compared to other types of research. The PVT will be conducted during Presidential election and local elections in the capital (election of Kyiv city mayor, and of members to local council by party lists).
All summaries are based on generally recognized principles and requirements for the organization and conduct of the democratic elections. These standards are represented in the Venice Commission Code of Good Practice in electoral matters, Copenhagen Documents, Commitments for Democratic Elections in OSCE Participating States.
SUMMARY
Elections of the President of Ukraine will be held under any circumstances. The effective legislation do not provide the minimum turnout or the minimal number of districts, where the voting should be conducted in order to determine election results. Such practice is not banned by international standards for organization of democratic elections. However, opponents of the state Ukraine and armed terroristic groups have intensified their activities on the eve of election day, in order to create political, but not legislative grounds for delegitimization of elections. On 95% of polling stations in Ukraine the preparation to the voting is uneventful and constructive. However, all attention of the public is focused on two eastern oblasts of Ukraine.
Realization of the constitutional right to vote is complicated in 50% raions of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts by threats of terroristic attacks, harassment, abduction of commission members, destruction of documentation. In result, a lot of commissions cannot fulfill their duties in civilian regime, and membership of PECs and DECs is being constantly changed. As of 20th May, 36% of members in all DECs were substituted. However, the personnel rotations in Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts are even higher. Local police is not able to resist the interference in the election process, as long as separatists, whose goal is to "prohibit" or disrupt the voting, have influence on law-enforcement agencies.
In such complicated conditions, the Verkhovna Rada had to take a decision on making amendments to the Law of Ukraine on Elections of the President of Ukraine, aimed to strengthen safety measures. In particular, the CEC was allowed to change district centers and premises of DECs operation to locations that are safer for organizing necessary election procedures; on request from CEC, increased security measures should be taken for district election commissions and State Voter Register maintenance bodies; increased security measures are taken for conveyance of election documentation now involving Security Service of Ukraine in addition to the Ministry of Internal Affairs etc.
However, the abovementioned measures can be effective only on the condition that that there is no sabotage on the part of local police, additional personnel reserve from other regions of Ukraine is mobilized and terrorist groups are confined to ATO locations.
OPORA observers keep counting various types of violations of the election process. In total, 297 violations have been recorded. The most common include violations of campaigning rules (147 incidents) and obstructing campaign participants and their representatives (104). Such situation is revealing, since the order of the most common violations has changed as compared to the parliamentary election of 2012. During the national election to Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, use of administrative resource and voter bribery were the most top-rated incidents.
Also, OPORA has compiled the candidates’ activeness rating and defined the most common type of campaigning used. According to the data gathered by the Civil Network OPORA, the following Presidential candidates had the most large-scale election campaigns: Petro Poroshenko (1 place for activeness), Yuliia Tymoshenko (2), Anatolii Hrytsenko (3), Oleh Tiahnybok (4), Oleh Liashko (5). The least active candidates are: Andrii Hrynenko, Volodymyr Saranov, Vasyl Tsushko, Zorian Shkiriak, and Oleksandr Klymenko. This rating is based on the summary of information about various campaigning activities conducted in all 213 districts. According to OPORA's monitoring results, the most popular type of campaigning during the snap Presidential Election was media campaigning (publications, announcements, public addresses, information materials in local media (TV, radio, newspapers, Internet)). The second popular type of campaigning was outdoor advertising. Street campaigning holds the third place. However, the candidates and their headquarters were the least active in direct campaigning.
The latest polls confirm Ukrainians’ readiness to vote and potentially high turnout. The proof point for this is the fact that Ukrainians’ took care to ensure their possibility to vote out of registered residence locations. In total, 171078 citizens of Ukraine have submitted applications to State Voter Register maintenance bodies in order to temporarily change their voting location. 34% of them are members of precinct election commissions. Most frequently, Ukrainians wished to vote at their current, not permanent, residence locations in Kyiv – 20257 people, Lviv – 14032, and Kyivska oblast – 13531. 4451 residents of Crimea and 1587 residents of the city of Sevastopol have changed their voting locations from the peninsula to the continent. The majority of them will vote in Kyiv – 1483, Mykolaiv - 763, and Kyivska oblast – 442 people.
District and Precinct election commissions operations, rotations
The need to properly organize the work of precinct election commissions (PEC) is the major challenge on the day before the election common to all regions of Ukraine. PECs that were hastily formed on 6th May are operating under conditions of wide-scale commission member rotation caused by numerous requests on the part of the presidential candidates. Poor selection of PEC members by campaign headquarters resulted in massive rotations of PEC members. Besides that, a lot of commission members in eastern oblasts of Ukraine refuse to fulfill their duties because they are threatened and under physical pressure of pro-Russian terroristic groups.
By this time, generally, PECs have successfully performed main election procedures. They have received voters lists and information posters and delivered invitations to voters. However, due to the constant member rotation and minimal number of members in most of them, as well as insufficient members’ competence there is a high probability of serious operational problems on the day of election.
It s worth noting that under these complicated conditions precinct election commissions, generally, managed to perform their duties and have effectively solved the problems of member substitution while at the same time performing other scheduled activities. Operations of DEC were also hampered by constant change of their members widely practiced by the presidential candidates. As of 20th May, more than third part (36 %) of membership in DECs was substituted. Main reason of rotations was that subjects, which submitted documents for inclusion in commissions, filed appeals for the substitution of these commission members. The candidates with the highest percentage of replacement were Vasyl Tsushko (83% of DEC members from this candidate were replaced), Volodymyr Saranov (74% replacement), and Renat Kuzmin (71% replacement). The lowest rate of DEC member rotation were on the part of Oleg Tiahnybok (9% replacement) and Zorian Shkiriak (9%). Due to the official withdrawal of the candidates Natalia Korolevska and Oleg Tsarev their representatives in DEC were dismissed – 210 and 156 members of DEC respectively. A lot of commission members from candidates, who de facto stopped participating in election campaign (particularly Petro Symonenko), are in fact sabotage activities of election commissions.
In May, district election commissions have been busy forming precinct election commissions, receiving and transferring ballots, transferring information posters to PECs, registering official observers from candidates and NGOs. District election commissions have, in general, qualitatively fulfilled their duties. However, they faced the certain complications during the formation of PECs and during personnel rotations in commissions. The situation was even more complicated by the fact that DECs themselves were undergoing mass rotations.
At the stage of completing precinct election commissions, observers recorded individual instances of abuse on the part of DECs. In particular, in Poltavska oblast, DECs have unlawfully refused to accept applications from the PEC members on their withdrawal from senior positions and from work in PECs and instead have recommended them to apply for rotation to campaign headquarters, which have submitted the request. And in Lvivska oblast, the DEC #123 have abused the principle of proportional division of senior positions in a PEC in accordance with applications from the candidates’ authorized representatives.
After the commission members have defined quotas with the help of information-analytical system “Election of the President of Ukraine”, the Head of the DEC proposed commission members and candidates’ authorized representatives to negotiate senior positions in all PECs (at coordination meetings), that means to share senior positions in PECs in accordance to quotas and at will of persons who have submitted those applications. However, they failed to do so in accordance to quotas calculated by the software as is evident through analysis of the approved lists of precinct election commissions. In particular, such candidates as Tymoshenko, Poroshenko, Bogomolets, and Tiahnybok got more senior positions in commissions than was envisaged by by the proportional distribution.Instead, as a result of negotiation, the quotas of candidates proposed by Kuibida, Liashko, Tihipko, and Malomuzh were reduced. Such distribution was agreed upon and voted for at the meeting of the district commission on 6th May. By this act, the commission members have violated the norm of the Law of Ukraine On Election of the President of Ukraine – p.11, pt.24, which defines the right of every subject of application for a proportional quota in each category of senior positions.
While the majority of the elected PECs have held their first meetings on time, observers have found typical problems with their organization. The most frequent one is the absence of quorum.
Almost all district election commissions performed trainings for PEC members. Also, polling stations are provided with manuals covering in detail all issues related to the election of the President of Ukraine in 2014. However, since at least up to one third and sometimes even up to one half of PEC members were rotated, the new members of PECs have not had appropriate training. This will have a negative effect on the work of PECs, especially in the day of voting. Besides, changes have a destructive effect on the ongoing preparations, since some people, who have already started performing specific tasks (conveying invitations, preparing voting cabins), are suddenly replaced while the work is not yet finished.
The critical problem in the eastern oblasts of Ukraine is frequent refusals of PECs members to participate in commissions work due to the threats to their personal security. Another typical for all Ukrainian territory reason for rotations in DECs is that proxies of candidates submitted documents of people who didn't agree to become commission members, without their permission, or even individuals who don't exist (so-called "dead souls"). There were no facts of PECs operation disruption due to incomplete commissions recorded so far.
In May, PECs were obliged to receive preliminary voter lists from State Voter Register bodies and provide voters with an opportunity to check voter lists in the premises of the polling stations. NGOs observers have not revealed any major violations at this stage. Most of the PECs provided the opportunity to freely check voter lists. Yet there were instances (Zakarpattia oblast), when PECs premises were temporarily closed. There also were individual facts recorded (Odasa oblast), when voter lists were locked in a safe or were constantly kept by the Head of the commission who was absent at his work place.
Another important function of PECs is delivery of personal invitations to voters. According to PECs data, almost all invitations are distributed, although observers receive voters’ complaints for not receiving invitations (in particular, in Odesa oblast).
District and polling station election commissions operation in the unstable regions (Luhansk and Donetsk oblast).
Under conditions of the military aggression of the Russian Federation towards Ukraine and activities of pro-Russian terrorist groups running the election in Luhansk and Donetsk oblasts is highly complicated and at places completely blocked. The possibility of proper running the election in most districts of the region is reduced to the minimum.
According to experts’ evaluation, there is high probability of election disruption in 14 out of 22 districts of the Donetsk oblast. In 7 districts there are substantial problems with election preparation, although the measures are being taken to stabilze the situation. Only in the TED #41 (city of Donetsk) observers do not find major risks for the election process. The absolute majority of commissions in Donetska oblast work under extreme conditions, practically in secret, not advertising their work. In accordance with the Decree of the Interim President of Ukraine DECs’ premises are guarded by the police. In practice, this guardianship does not guarantee safety to commission members and does not prevent separatist militants from seizing commissions’ premises.
In Luhansk oblast, the work of some DECs (#105, 106, 108, 111) is literally blocked by the separatists of so called Luhansk People’s Republic. Other DECs (# 107, 109, 112, 113, 116) operate under serious obstructions on the part of the separatists. Only the DECs # 114 and 115 in the northern districts of the oblast (Bilovodskyi, Markivskyi, Milovskyi, Novopeskovskyi, Bilokurakynskyi, Kreminskyi, Novoaidarskyi, Svativskyi, Starobliskyi, and Troitskyi districts) operate as normal. The election in the district #113 (Rubizhne) and partially in the 110 (Lysychansk), can be organized only if the situation is swiftly taken under control.
Table 1
“Distribution of TEDs of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts by the probability of voting disruption on 25th May 2014. As of 05/20/2014”
|
Districts with stable situation and low probability ov voting disruption |
Districts with high probability of voting disruption, serious security challenges and terrorist threats |
Districts with uncertain situation (there are threats but stabilization measures are being taken) |
|
TED #41 |
TED #42 |
TED #43 |
|
TED #114 |
TED #45 |
TED #44 |
|
TED #115 |
TED #47 |
TED #46 |
|
TED #48 |
TED #49 |
|
|
TED #50 |
TED #55 |
|
|
TED #51 |
TED #56 |
|
|
TED #52 |
TED #61 |
|
|
TED #53 |
TED #110 |
|
|
TED #54 |
TED #112 |
|
|
TED #57 |
||
|
TED #58 |
||
|
TED #59 |
||
|
TED #60 |
||
|
TED #62 |
||
|
TED #105 |
||
|
TED #106 |
||
|
TED #107 |
||
|
TED #108 |
||
|
TED #109 |
||
|
TED #111 |
||
|
TED #113 |
||
|
TED #116 |
Donetsk oblast
Separatist activities destabilize election process in Donetsk oblast and pose serious obstacles to free voting by the citizens. Armed militants of the so called “Donetsk People’s Republic” regularly assault the premises of DECs and PECs, capture and threaten election commission members. In particular, on 20th May, the militants have raided the premises of the district commission #46 in Artemivsk. Armed with automatic firearms, the criminals invaded the building of the City Council, where the commission is being located. They took weapons from the security personnel, shattered the premises of the commission, and stole documentation and some of personal belongings of the commission members.
At the same time, on 19th May a number of unlawful acts were committed aimed at disrupting operations of election commissions. Among other things, the militants siezed the Head of the district commission #44 Liudmyla Petrivna Bushueva as a hostage. However, later the woman was released. At the polling station # 141844 of the district #43 in Donetsk, the three armed representatives of “DPR” threatened the Head of the precinct election commission. They demanded to stop preparations for the election of the President of Ukraine, threatened to kill the Head of the commision if it contnues operation.
Also in Shakhtarsk, the two armed representatives of the “Donetsk People’s Republic” attempted to block operation of the district commission #55. They demanded the commission members to give them the seal and documentation, threatened them with the firearms. The police have resolved the situation by negotiating deblocking of the commission with the “DPR” representatives.
Representatives of the “DPR” have also assaulted the DEC #54 (town of Torez), the DEC #42 (city of Donetsk), the DEC #48 (Kramatorsk), and the DEC #52 (Horlivka). The DEC #53 in Yenakieve operated under extremely difficult conditions. The premises of the City Council, where the commission is registered, are captured. The DEC constantly changes its locations. The DEC #53 requested the assistance of the mayor Mr. V.V.Oleinyk in finding premises (with the proposal to return to the City Council, where the DEC is registered). The mayor refused saying that that would lead to bloodshed in the town. On 15th May the DEC#45 was robbed. The armed people have stolen computer system units belonging to the DEC. At the same time, on 24th May the unknown individuals, based on the “decree” of the so-called “Donetsk People’s Republic” sealed the premises of the DEC #45.
In Donetsk oblast, the election process faces substantial organizational challenges. According to observers’ evaluation, in 14 out of 22 districts of the Donetsk oblast there is high probability of voting disruption. In 7 districts there are serious problems with arranging the election process, but the stabilizing measures are being taken. Only in the DEC #41 (city of Donetsk) the observers have not found any major risks for running the election.
During the reported period, illegal armed groups have strengthened the pressure on election commission members and invigorated the illegal activities aimed at disruption the election in Donetsk oblast. There are numerous instances recorded of district and precinct election commissions’ premises seizures as well as illegal captures of the respective commission members. These circumstances demoralize DECs and PECs members and make their capabilities to arrange voting properly doubtful.
In Donetsk oblast there are numerous instances of PECs violating deadlines for holding their first meetings. These violations were conditioned by the three circumstances: 1) absence of quorum at PEC meetings; 2) some of the PECs are still not completed; 3) high crime rate. In particular, in the TED #43 only 70% of PECs have held their first meetings. The problem of quorum becomes more and more acute on the daily basis, since people simply fear going to work.
In the district # 45 (town of Khartsizsk) 11 out 95 PECs are not yet formed, since the DEC cannot form a PEC with the minimum number of members. At the same time, in the TED #58 PEC member rotations take place on a massive scale. Currently, 10 out of 116 PECs do not operate.
In the district #57 only 14 out of 113 PECs operate. In the TED#49, the first meetings of PECs were also happening with numerous violations due to quorum absence. In TED #52 as of the morning, 19th May, only 10 out of 109 PECs had held their first meetings. According to the DEC data, there are serious problems with PECs operation in Dzerzhinsk, where the City Council is under control of the DPR militants.
In the Donetsk oblast, only a small number of PECs have received preliminary voter lists. In particular, as of 19th May, 6 out of 99 PECs in the TED #43 have received voter lists. In the TED #49 only 51 out of 103 regular polling stations have received preliminary voter lists. In the district #60, 55 PECs out of 148 have received preliminary vtoer lists. The absolute majority of the PECs in the region do not provide a possibility of checking preliminary voter lists.
It is only in rare cases that voters in the region have received personal invitations.
Luhansk oblast
Members of election commissions (especially DECs), often get threatened by the separatists. The police, in most cases, ignore the unlawful acts. In many towns and districts local authorities either openly demonstrate support to separatists (for example Luhansk Oblast Council, the mayor of the town of Antratsit) or do not oppose them.
In the ED #110, on 7th May 2014, the group of armed separatists captured nearly 20 PEC members and two members of DEC#119, particularly Serhii Lozovyi, as hostages. The incident had happened in the premises of Popasna State District Administration at the time PEC members were being registered for working on the polling stations of the Popasna district. The separatists have also destroyed all documentation and took the commission members’ personal documents.
On 17th May 2014, the separatists used physical force to the members of the PEC #4400555 in the ED #114. In the first half of the day, one of the separatists beat up a member of the PEC when he was delivering invitations to voters in the village of Stepove. Close to the noon, the Head of the PEC (in the village of Verkhniobohdanivka, in Stanychno-Luhanskyi district) was assaulted with a knife. Both PEC members filed statements to the police, but the MIA cannot react on those because almost all its personnel are moved to the town of Starobilsk.
At night on 15th May, the representatives of so-called “Luhansk People’s Republic” intruded into the premises of the DEC #105, took computer servers and election documentation. Later they have threatened the Head of the DEC and came to his place. The Head of the DEC was not at home at that moment, so the intruders beat up his wife and robbed the apartment.
On 15th May, the armed group of separatists broke into the building, where the DEC#106 is located. Voter lists and all PEC seals were stolen. The robbers took 2 system units containing all DEC documentation and took prisoners the two employees – a programmer and an IT-helpdesk officer.
The group of armed people have shattered the premises of the DEC #108 and partially destroyed election documentation. Similar incidents took place in the DECs # 109 and 114.
In Luhansk oblast, rotations of DEC members have been continuing from the moment the commissions were formed. In particular, only 8 commission members work at the DEC #110. Of them only three go to work and none of the candidates proposes other people for replacement in the DEC #110. Threats and physical pressure make people refuse working.
PEC members training took place in the TED# 105 (the training was not complete because of the risk of separatists assaulting the premises of the DEC), 106, 107, 110, 112, 113, 114, and 115. The trainings failed in TED #108, 109, 111, and 116.
At the PEC level, member replacements are also happening intensively, almost on a daily basis. Representatives of all presidential candidates refuse working as PEC members. The main reasons for that are threats to lives and health of themselves and of their families as well as the announced prohibition of the election in Luhansk oblast by the representatives of the so-called “Luhansk People’s Republic”. For instance, in the ED #109 only 38 out of 142 PECs (19 in the town of Krasnyi Luch, 19 – in Perevalskyi district) are operational. In the election district #114 in Stanychno-Luhanskyi district only 14 out of 43 PECs operate. Constant PEC member rotations take place in the ED#116 (Pervomaisk), where PECs are practically non-operational.
Preliminary voter lists were conveyed to the TEDs #107, 112, 113, 114, and 115. Voter lists were stolen in the DECs #105,106, and 113. Most of the PECs do not provide a possibility for voters to check the preliminary lists. In the DEC #114 at the territory of Stanychno-Luhanskyi and Slov’yanoserbskyi districts, only part of the PECs can allow voters to check the preliminary lists.
Personal invitations were delivered to the voters in the TEDs #107, 109, 115 110 (In Popasna district they are delivered only partially), 112, 113, and 114 (in Stanychno-Luhanskyi district delivery of personal invitations was terminated because of the separatist activities). In #105 and 106 personal invitations were distributed only partially.
Conflicts and public incidents, connected to the election campaign
Activities of armed separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts remain the key destabilizing factor for the election process. "Donetsk People's Republic" and "Luhansk People's Repuclic", which were determined by the Prosecutor General's Office as terroristic organizations, commit mass crimes against electoral rights of citizens. Members of election commissions, as well as premises, property, and equipment of the corresponding commissions, became the target for the terrorists. Attempts of extremists to threaten the voters with physical retribution for their participation in the snap election of the President of Ukraine is a cause for serious concern. Besides that, the seizure of TV communication facilities in Donetsk and Luhansk oblast had limited citizen access to Ukrainian media and, therefore, complicated the dissemination of objective and balanced information about the elections on these territories.
Systematic activities of unlawful units in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts caused possible disruption of voting in a large number of territorial communities in these regions. Due to the intensive dislocation of terroristic groups on the territory of these oblasts, it's difficult to tell how many voters may be deprived of the right to vote. First time for the whole history of independent Ukraine, the country faces such a large-scale counteraction to free voting, which requires exceptional efforts and non-standard approaches to secure the rule of law on 25th May 2014.
Separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts not only threaten members of election commissions, but also resort to actions which destabilize the general political situation in regions. In particular, the Mayor of Horlivka Yevhen Klep wrote a resignation letter while being threatened with a firearm. Later on, separatists have proclaimed Yevhen Matiukha as the "people's mayor" of city of Horlivka. It turned out, that Mr. Matiukha is the Head of DEC #52 representing the Presidential candidate Mykola Malomuzh. Besides that, separatists abducted the Acting Director of the Artemvuhillia State Enterprise, Mykola Alyshev. The official was accused of the intention to dismiss supporters of the terroristic organization "Donetsk people's republic" from the enterprise. There were some criminal incidents in other regions too. In city of Smila (Cherkasy obl.), the headquarters of Petro Poroshenko was set of fire.
In a number of Ukrainian regions, rotations of managing officials in law-enforcement bodies were made. In particular, the Chairman of the Central Administration of MIA of Ukraine in Mykolaiv oblast Yurii Sednev was appointed as the Head of Donetsk City Department of Internal Affairs. Taking into consideration that employees of the MIA in Donetsk oblast are demoralized and politically biased, such appointment is considered as an anti-crisis measure. Today, Artur Merikov is the Chairman of the Central Administration of MIA of Ukraine in Mykolaiv oblast. A new Chairman of Oblast Department of MIA of Ukraine was appointed in Odesa oblast. The rotation is related to tragic events of 2nd May in Odesa, when a lot of people died as a result of mass provocations and inaction of law-enforcement bodies. Law-enforcement bodies in Kirovohrad oblast had also changed their officials. Personnel rotations in law-enforcement bodies are especially important today, when the safety of election process is under threat.
In the regions, new personnel rotations appear in Raion State Administrations (Donetsk, Lviv, Khmelnytskyi, Kharkiv, and Zhytomyr oblasts). However, the election campaign influences the changes in the leadership of local self-government bodies and deputy corps of local councils. In particular, a number of Members of Mykolaiv Oblast Council elected from the Party of Regions have created new deputy groups "Strong Mykolaiv oblast" and "Unity". In this very Council, some councilors elected from the Party of Regions and AUU Batkivshchyna have created the deputy group "Solidarity". However, a new deputy group "Justice" was created in Vinnytsia Oblast Council by mostly ex-members of the Party of Regions.
In Uzhgorod City Council, a conflict appeared between members of the AUU Batkivshchyna afction due to the replacement of the Head of Yuliia Tymoshenko's headquarters in the TED #69.
There were also some election conflicts, related to media activities. In particular, some media in city of Melitopol have publicly addressed the Presidential candidate Petro Poroshenko concerning monopolization of informational content of the TRK "Melitopol" communal enterprise in his favor.
Besides incidents in Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, OPORA's observers haven't noticed any conflicts that may hinder free voting process.
Activeness of candidates for the President of Ukraine
According to the data gathered by the Civil Network OPORA, the following Presidential candidates had the most large-scale election campaigns: Petro Poroshenko (1 place for activeness), Yuliia Tymoshenko (2), Anatolii Hrytsenko (3), Oleh Tiahnybok (4), Oleh Liashko (5). Serhii Tihipko, Mykhailo Dobkin, Olha Bohomolets hold the 6th, 7th, and 8th places among 21 Presidential candidates who are the most active in campaigning. The least active candidates were: Andrii Hrynenko, Volodymyr Saranov, Vasyl Tsushko, Vadym Rabinovych, Renat Kuzmin. This rating is based on the summary of information about various campaigning activities conducted in all 213 districts.
Candidates used campaigning in local media the most often. The most active in this type of campaigning was Yuliia Tymoshenko. Outdoor advertising is the second popular type of campaigning (1st place - Petro Poroshenko). Street campaigning was most actively used by Yuliia Tymoshenko. Instead, Petro Poroshenko and his representatives were focused on direct campaigning. У той же час кампанія «від дверей до дверей», збір підписів, листування, зустрічі з громадянами не стали популярними заходами серед усіх кандидатів.
In May, 21 candidates for the President of Ukraine continued fighting for voters' support. Only during 2004 Presidential Election the number of nominated candidates exceeded the number of candidates during this snap Presidential race. In 2004, 24 candidates were nominated for the President of Ukraine.
The candidates could withdraw their candidacies by sending an appeal to the CEC till 2nd May inclusive. Такою можливістю скористалися двоє: Oleh Tsariov and Natalia Korolevska. Another three candidates (Petro Symonenko, Zorian Shkiriak, and Oleksandr Klymenko) have announced that they are removing their candidacies after the deadline established by the legislation. Therefore, these announcements won't have any legal consequences, and candidates' names won't be removed from ballot papers.
OPORA's observers have examined how Presidential candidates were campaigning in all 213 territorial election districts. Monitoring of campaigning activities in territorial election districts was focused on 5 types of election activeness: 1) outdoor advertising; 2) media advertising; 3) street campaigning; 4) direct campaigning; 5) functioning headquarters. On the basis of information gathered in every district, we created the activeness rating for Presidential candidates in this election campaign. This rating shows how well the candidates covered election districts with their campaigning, assess the scale of election campaigning conducted by every candidate, shows the most popular types of campaigning. 4 of 5 parameters of the analysis are related to the campaigning; 1 parameter shows the scale of organizational structure of a candidate, created for the conduction of election campaigning.
"Types of campaigning activities conducted by Presidential candidates in 213 territorial election districts"
|
Types of campaigning activities |
Scale of organizational structure |
|||
|
3. Street advertising |
4. Direct campaigning |
5. The presence of candidate's headquarters in the district |
|
|
Billboards, city lights, placards etc. |
Media campaigning – publications, announcements, public addresses, information materials in local media (TV, radio, newspapers, Internet) |
Rallies, marches, demonstrations, pickets; campaigning tents; dissemination of printed campaign materials; concerts, exhibitions, sport competitions, film shows etc. |
Door-to-door campaign, meetings with voters, collection of signatures, phone calls, direct correspondence |
A permanent structure with staffers, which activities are directed to secure the election campaign of a candidate |
Besides that, there are special ratings on every type of campaigning, which show the number of election districts, where they were noticed. The scale of organizational structure in every district was also assessed.
The most widespread types of campaigning
According to OPORA's monitoring results, the most popular type of campaigning during the snap Presidential Election was media campaigning (publications, announcements, public addresses, information materials in local media (TV, radio, newspapers, Internet)). The largest number of candidates used this type of campaigning in the biggest number of election districts. The second popular type of campaigning was outdoor advertising. Street campaigning holds the third place. However, the candidates and their headquarters were the least active in direct campaigning.
As for the media advertising, it was most often used by the following candidates: Yuliia Tymoshenko, Petro Poroshenko, Serhii Tihipko, Anatolii Hrytsenko, and Oleh Tiahnybok. The least often this types of campaigning was used by: Vasyl Tsushko, Oleksandr Klymenko, Andrii Hrynenko, Volodymyr Saranov, and Vasyl Kuibida.
Table 3
"Media advertising of candidates in 215 election districts"
|
№ |
Candidate for the President of Ukraine |
Number of election districts, covered by the media advertising of a candidate |
|
1. |
Tymoshenko Yuliia Volodymyrivna |
164 |
|
2. |
Poroshenko Petro Oleksiiovych |
162 |
|
3. |
Tihipko Serhii Leonidovych |
113 |
|
4. |
Hrytsenko Anatolii Stepanovych |
112 |
|
5. |
Tiahnybok Oleh Yaroslavovych |
101 |
|
6. |
Liashko Oleh Valeriiovych |
93 |
|
7. |
Dobkin Mykhailo Markovych |
79 |
|
8. |
Bohomolets Olha Vadymivna |
75 |
|
9. |
Konovaliuk Valerii Illich |
46 |
|
10. |
Symonenko Petro Mykolaiovych |
39 |
|
11. |
Kuzmin Renat Raveliiovych |
30 |
|
12. |
Yarosh Dmytro Anatoliiovych |
29 |
|
13. |
Rabinovych Vadym Zinoviovych |
22 |
|
14. |
Boiko Yurii Anatoliiovych |
22 |
|
15. |
Malomuzh Mykola Hryhorovych |
13 |
|
16. |
Шкіряк Зорян Несторович |
13 |
|
17. |
Kubiida Vasyl Stepanovych |
11 |
|
18. |
Saranov Volodymyr Heorhiiovych |
10 |
|
19. |
Hrynenko Andrii Valeriiovych |
7 |
|
20. |
Klymenko Oleksandr Ivanovych |
7 |
|
21. |
Tsushko Vasyl Petrovych |
7 |
The outdoor advertising was most often used by five candidates: Petro Poroshenko, Anatolii Hrytsenko, Mykhailo Dobkin, Serhii Tihipko, and Oleh Liashko. The least often outdoor advertising was used by Yurii Boiko, Vasyl Tsushko, Oleksandr Klymenko, Andrii Hrynenko, and Vasyl Kuibida.
Table 4
"Outdoor advertising of candidates in 213 election districts"
|
№ |
Candidate for the President of Ukraine |
Number of election districts, covered by the outdoor advertising of a candidate |
|
1. |
Poroshenko Petro Oleksiiovych |
158 |
|
2. |
Hrytsenko Anatolii Stepanovych |
152 |
|
3. |
Dobkin Mykhailo Markovych |
138 |
|
4. |
Tihipko Serhii Leonidovych |
126 |
|
5. |
Liashko Oleh Valeriiovych |
125 |
|
6. |
Tymoshenko Yuliia Volodymyrivna |
123 |
|
7. |
Konovaliuk Valerii Illich |
86 |
|
8. |
Tiahnybok Oleh Yaroslavovych |
85 |
|
9. |
Bohomolets Olha Vadymivna |
41 |
|
10. |
Kuzmin Renat Raveliiovych |
30 |
|
11. |
Symonenko Petro Mykolaiovych |
15 |
|
12. |
Saranov Volodymyr Heorhiiovych |
11 |
|
13. |
Yarosh Dmytro Anatoliiovych |
10 |
|
14. |
Rabinovych Vadym Zinoviovych |
4 |
|
15. |
Malomuzh Mykola Hryhorovych |
2 |
|
16. |
Шкіряк Зорян Несторович |
2 |
|
17. |
Kubiida Vasyl Stepanovych |
2 |
|
18. |
Hrynenko Andrii Valeriiovych |
2 |
|
19. |
Klymenko Oleksandr Ivanovych |
2 |
|
20. |
Tsushko Vasyl Petrovych |
2 |
|
21. |
Boiko Yurii Anatoliiovych |
1 |
As for the street campaigning (rallies, marches, demonstrations, pickets; campaigning tents; dissemination of printed campaign materials; concerts, exhibitions, sport competitions, film shows etc.), it was the most often used by Yuliia Tymoshenko, Petro Poroshenko, Anatolii Hrytsenko, Oleh Tiahnybok and Oleh Liashko. However, Oleksandr Klymenko, Zorian Shkiriak, Vasyl Tsushko, Andrii Hrynenko, and Mykola Malomuzh barely used this type of campaigning.
Table 5
"Street campaigning of candidates in 213 election districts"
|
№ |
Candidate for the President of Ukraine |
Number of election districts, covered by the street campaigning of a candidate |
|
1. |
Tymoshenko Yuliia Volodymyrivna |
157 |
|
2. |
Poroshenko Petro Oleksiiovych |
153 |
|
3. |
Hrytsenko Anatolii Stepanovych |
149 |
|
4. |
Tiahnybok Oleh Yaroslavovych |
126 |
|
5. |
Liashko Oleh Valeriiovych |
86 |
|
6. |
Bohomolets Olha Vadymivna |
54 |
|
7. |
Tihipko Serhii Leonidovych |
53 |
|
8. |
Symonenko Petro Mykolaiovych |
37 |
|
9. |
Dobkin Mykhailo Markovych |
32 |
|
10. |
Yarosh Dmytro Anatoliiovych |
30 |
|
11. |
Boiko Yurii Anatoliiovych |
14 |
|
12. |
Konovaliuk Valerii Illich |
4 |
|
13. |
Rabinovych Vadym Zinoviovych |
4 |
|
14. |
Kubiida Vasyl Stepanovych |
4 |
|
15. |
Kuzmin Renat Raveliiovych |
1 |
|
16. |
Saranov Volodymyr Heorhiiovych |
1 |
|
17. |
Malomuzh Mykola Hryhorovych |
1 |
|
18. |
Hrynenko Andrii Valeriiovych |
1 |
|
19. |
Tsushko Vasyl Petrovych |
1 |
|
20. |
Шкіряк Зорян Несторович |
0 |
|
21. |
Klymenko Oleksandr Ivanovych |
0 |
The direct campaigning (door-to-door campaign, meetings with voters, collection of signatures, phone calls, direct correspondence) was most often used by Petro Poroshenko, Yuliia Tymoshenko, Anatolii Hrytsenko, Oleh Tiahnybok, Olha Bohomolets. However, Oleksandr Klymenko, Zorian Shkiriak, Vasyl Tsushko, Volodymyr Saranov, Renat Kuzmin, Valerii Konovaliuk, and Yurii Boiko didn't use this type of campaigning at all.
Table 6
"Direct campaigning of candidates in 213 election districts"
|
№ |
Candidate for the President of Ukraine |
Number of election districts, covered by direct campaigning of candidates |
|
1. |
Poroshenko Petro Oleksiiovych |
111 |
|
2. |
Tymoshenko Yuliia Volodymyrivna |
105 |
|
3. |
Hrytsenko Anatolii Stepanovych |
64 |
|
4. |
Tiahnybok Oleh Yaroslavovych |
64 |
|
5. |
Bohomolets Olha Vadymivna |
46 |
|
6. |
Liashko Oleh Valeriiovych |
40 |
|
7. |
Tihipko Serhii Leonidovych |
25 |
|
8. |
Dobkin Mykhailo Markovych |
19 |
|
9. |
Symonenko Petro Mykolaiovych |
8 |
|
10. |
Yarosh Dmytro Anatoliiovych |
6 |
|
11. |
Kubiida Vasyl Stepanovych |
6 |
|
12. |
Malomuzh Mykola Hryhorovych |
5 |
|
13. |
Rabinovych Vadym Zinoviovych |
3 |
|
14. |
Hrynenko Andrii Valeriiovych |
2 |
|
15. |
Boiko Yurii Anatoliiovych |
0 |
|
16. |
Konovaliuk Valerii Illich |
0 |
|
17. |
Kuzmin Renat Raveliiovych |
0 |
|
18. |
Saranov Volodymyr Heorhiiovych |
0 |
|
19. |
Tsushko Vasyl Petrovych |
0 |
|
20. |
Шкіряк Зорян Несторович |
0 |
|
21. |
Klymenko Oleksandr Ivanovych |
0 |
Organizational structures of candidates in election districts
OPORA has analyzed activities of temporary functioning election headquarters in 2015 territorial election districts. The most powerful election headquarters were created by Yuliia Tymoshenko, Petro Poroshenko, Anatolii Hrytsenko, Oleh Tiahnybok, and Oleh Liashko. Andrii Hrynenko, Volodymyr Saranov, Vasyl Tsushko, Vadym Rabinovych, and Renat Kuzmin have little number of temporary organizational structures in districts.
Table 7
"Electoral headquarters of candidates in election districts"
|
№ |
Candidate for the President of Ukraine |
Number of election districts, where temporary election headquarters of candidates are functioning |
|
1. |
Tymoshenko Yuliia Volodymyrivna |
182 |
|
2. |
Poroshenko Petro Oleksiiovych |
175 |
|
3. |
Hrytsenko Anatolii Stepanovych |
150 |
|
4. |
Tiahnybok Oleh Yaroslavovych |
136 |
|
5. |
Liashko Oleh Valeriiovych |
97 |
|
6. |
Tihipko Serhii Leonidovych |
96 |
|
7. |
Symonenko Petro Mykolaiovych |
88 |
|
8. |
Bohomolets Olha Vadymivna |
84 |
|
9. |
Dobkin Mykhailo Markovych |
80 |
|
10. |
Yarosh Dmytro Anatoliiovych |
48 |
|
11. |
Kubiida Vasyl Stepanovych |
35 |
|
12. |
Malomuzh Mykola Hryhorovych |
32 |
|
13. |
Klymenko Oleksandr Ivanovych |
21 |
|
14. |
Boiko Yurii Anatoliiovych |
17 |
|
15. |
Шкіряк Зорян Несторович |
16 |
|
16. |
Konovaliuk Valerii Illich |
15 |
|
17. |
Kuzmin Renat Raveliiovych |
8 |
|
18. |
Rabinovych Vadym Zinoviovych |
7 |
|
19. |
Tsushko Vasyl Petrovych |
6 |
|
20. |
Saranov Volodymyr Heorhiiovych |
3 |
|
21. |
Hrynenko Andrii Valeriiovych |
2 |
The general activeness rating of candidates for the President of Ukraine in election campaign
On the basis of monitoring results on the course of election campaign in 213 districts, OPORA created the general activeness rating for candidates. The place of every candidate is determined as the sum of all five types of election activities (outdoor advertising+media advertising+street campaigning+direct campaigning+functioning of permanent headquarters), noticed in the certain number of districts. This rating shows the scale of election campaign of a certain candidate during the snap Presidential Election in Ukraine.
The following candidates were the most actively campaigning during the snap Presidential Election in Ukraine: Petro Poroshenko, Yuliia Tymoshenko, Anatolii Hrytsenko, Oleh Tiahnybok, and Oleh Liashko. The least active election campaigns had: Andrii Hrynenko, Vasyl Tsushko, Volodymyr Saranov, Oleksanlr Klymenko, and Zorian Shkiriak.
Table 8
"The general activeness rating of candidates for the President of Ukraine in election districts"
|
Place in the rating |
Candidate for the President of Ukraine |
|
1. |
Poroshenko Petro Oleksiiovych |
|
2. |
Tymoshenko Yuliia Volodymyrivna |
|
3. |
Hrytsenko Anatolii Stepanovych |
|
4. |
Tiahnybok Oleh Yaroslavovych |
|
5. |
Liashko Oleh Valeriiovych |
|
6. |
Tihipko Serhii Leonidovych |
|
7. |
Dobkin Mykhailo Markovych |
|
8. |
Bohomolets Olha Vadymivna |
|
9. |
Symonenko Petro Mykolaiovych |
|
10. |
Konovaliuk Valerii Illich |
|
11. |
Yarosh Dmytro Anatoliiovych |
|
12. |
Kuzmin Renat Raveliiovych |
|
13. |
Kubiida Vasyl Stepanovych |
|
14. |
Boiko Yurii Anatoliiovych |
|
15. |
Malomuzh Mykola Hryhorovych |
|
16. |
Rabinovych Vadym Zinoviovych |
|
17. |
Шкіряк Зорян Несторович |
|
18. |
Klymenko Oleksandr Ivanovych |
|
19. |
Saranov Volodymyr Heorhiiovych |
|
20. |
Tsushko Vasyl Petrovych |
|
21. |
Hrynenko Andrii Valeriiovych |
Violation of campaigning rules
With intensified campaigning on its final stage, instances of campaigning rules violations become more frequent. Almost in all regions of Ukraine, observers report about surge of "dirty campaigning" (printed materials and content in social networks), directed mostly on Yuliia Tymoshenko and Petro Poroshenko. Dissemination of campaigning materials without an imprint, and their placement in prohibited locations became typical incidents. Such violations are committed by representatives of Oleg Liashko, Petro Poroshenko, Dmytro Yarosh, Yulia Tymoshenko, Sergii Tihipko. There happen to be individual instances of administrative resource abuse and participation of officials in campaigning activities to the benefit of the candidates Oleg Tiahnybik, Petro Poroshenko, Yulia Tymoshenko, Mykhailo Dobkin, Serhii Tihipko. So-called "dzhynsa" (hidden advertising) – political ads in printed mass media without the corresponding marking, under the mask of news, was quite often disseminated. At the same time, there are no major violations of the electoral legislation recorded that can influence the election results in this segment of the campaign.
There still remains the problem of nontransperant funding of electoral campaigns and, in particular, of functioning election funds of the candidates. Civil Network OPORA observers have repeatedly recorded the facts of paying campaign activists unofficially, from outside of a candidate’s election fund.
Participation of the state officials in the election campaign, abuse of administrative resources
Visits of candidates to the regions of Ukraine are often accompanied by state officials campaigning for these candidates. Thus when O. Tyahnybok visited the city of Kirovograd as a candidate, he together with the Head of the Oblast Administration participated in presentation of the territorial security battalion that took place in the premises of Kirovograd Oblast Administration. During various speeches Tyahnybok was presented as a Member of Parliament and presidential candidate.
Observers report cases, when local officials openly campaign for presidential candidates or use budget resources for campaigning. For instance, Ivan Marzak, the Head of Komintern Regional Council (Dnipropetrovsk oblast) is openly campaigning for another presidential candidate - Serhiy Tihipko. First Deputy Head of Zakarpattya Oblast Council Vasyl Brenzovych campaigns for Petro Poroshenko with the help of the local newspaper “News of Zakarpattya”. At the same time Ivan Baloha – the Head of Zakarpattya Oblast Council supports P. Poroshenko via social networks. An article campaigning for the presidential candidate Mykhailo Dobkin was already published in April on the official homepage of Sverdlovsk City Council (Luhansk oblast). And the homepage of Bila Tserkva Regional State Administration in the electoral district№ 91 informed about a planned visit of Yulia Tymoshenko.
In Pyatykhatky (Dnipropetrovsk oblast) social workers are campaigning for Mykhailo Dobkin. The Head of the Municipal Enterprise of Water Supply and Waste Water Treatment of Dniprodzerdzhynsk city (LLC № 30) made his workers participate in the meeting with Mykhailo Dobkin that took place in Lesya Ukrainka Theatre. In response, the workers of this enterprise wrote letters of complaint to the cityexecutive committee.
The leader of Batkivshchyna party, presidential candidate Yulia Tymoshenko initiated an All-Ukrainian meeting of village, town and city council heads and local council deputies that was heldin the city of Kyiv. The Head of Zhytomyr Oblast Council Vitaliy Frantsuz made a speech at his working time and called to support Yulia Tymoshenko at the presidential elections.
Campaigning conducted by members of election commissions
On the whole, members of the election commissions keep to the requirements of the Law of Ukraine on prohibition of their participation in election campaigning. However, the observers reported individual instances of abuse on the part of commission members. Particularly, in Khmelnytsk Oblast (electoral district№ 192) a member of the DEC used a pen with the election slogan of P. O. Poroshenko “Live in a new way!” when preparing observer certificates and reporting about document submission. A member of the DEC № 205 from the candidate Oleh Tyahnybok distributed campaign materials of Yulia Tymoshenko during the commission meeting. Also members of the PEC wore campaign T-shirts of the candidate Olha Bohomoletsin the premises of this DEC. In the DEC premises of the electoral district№ 65 (the city of Korosten) the box with the documents had symbols of the Communist party of Ukraine. These documents were stored in the office of the election commission secretary (from the candidate for the President of Ukraine M.M. Dobkin).
Distribution of printed campaign materials without reference information as well as political advertising without appropriate labelling
Cases of violating campaigning rules by the candidates are among the most widespread types of abuse about which the observers of the OPORA Civil Network reported during the last month of the election campaign. Hidden campaigning in the printed mass media is widely spread in all regions of Ukraine. Many regional mass media present political advertising without any labelling. Image campaign materials are positioned as products of journalists. When responding to observers’ remarks, publication editorial boards do not deny the fact that these are election campaign articles and inform that they are directly ordered by the customers. The leaders of such ordered materials are such presidential candidates as: Yulia Tymoshenko, Serhiy Tihipko and Petro Poroshenko.
Distribution of the campaign materials which do not contain all the reference data is a systemic violation of the electoral legislation. This type of abuse was registered in different regions of Ukraine on the part of the following candidates: Oleh Lyashko (campaign calendars, billboards), Dmytro Yarosh (newspaper The Right Sector), Anatoliy Hrytsenko (newspaper I guarantee security), Petro Poroshenko (campaign materials with the slogan “Live in a new way! Petro Poroshenko”, campaign posters, newspaper “President 2014”), Oleh Tyahnybok (campaign banners).
Using “black PR” and “dirty campaigning”
The final weeks of the election campaign were followed by the campaign outburst that had the features of unreliable or slander information about the candidates, which is a direct violation of the part 5 of the article 64 of the Law of Ukraine on Election of the President of Ukraine. The main target of “black PR” was candidate P.Poroshenko and to a lesser extent Y. Tymoshenko, S.Tihipko and O.Lyashko. Namely,identical campaign materials called “Only the facts” that contained anti campaign against Pertro Poroshenko were distributed in Rivne, Kirovohrad, Ivano-Frankivsk and Cherkassy oblasts. Observers also reported “dirty campaigning” articles against Yulia Tymoshenko in regional mass media.
Other violations of the election campaign rules
The Law of Ukraine on Election of the President of Ukraine (part 5 of the article 64) places the limitations on campaigning in military units and detention centres. Election campaign can be organised here only by district election commissionsand all the candidates must be informed in advance about such measures. Nonetheless, OPORA observers detected cases of illegal campaigning in the military units by the candidates Y. Tymoshenko and P.Poroshenko. Thus, on 30th April Y. Tymoshenko met with the military personnel mobilized to the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Rivne military polygon. During this visit the administration of the OC “Pivnich” organised firearms training using Grad volley-fire system. Other candidates were not informed about this campaign event. At the same timeP.Porshenko, during his visit to Mykolaiv, met with the representatives of the National Guard dislocated in the military unit. Only journalists were present at this meeting. According to the secretary of the district election commission № 129, where this military unit is located, Poroshenko did not discuss his visit to the military unit with the DEC members.
Obstruction to political activities of candidates and parties
Cases of pressure on the candidates, obstruction to their activities, destruction of their property and campaign materials by unknown persons became more frequent. Some of the candidates faced certain difficulties in their campaigning activity because of arson attacks on their party offices (Petro Symonenko in Zaporizhzhya and Kirovograd oblasts, Yulia Tymoshenko in Luhansk and Serhiy Tihipko in Donetsk oblasts) destruction of campaigning tents (Anatoliy Hrytsenko in Kyiv and Yulia Tymoshenko in Kharkiv oblasts), damaging advertising media (Mykhailo Dobkin in Kyiv and Kherson oblasts).
On 30th April, an unsuccessful attempt of arson attack on the regional committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine (CPU) was made in Zaporizhzhya. On 8th May, in Kirovohgrad oblast, somebody attacked the office of the CPU and the regional headquarters of P. Symonenko by throwing a bottle fire bomb. Also on 15th May the election headquarters of the presidential candidate Olha Bohomolets were robbedin Zaporizhzhya. On the whole during May several attacks were made on campaigning tents of Petro Poroshenko, Anatoliy Hrytsenko and Mykhailo Dobkin in the oblast.
Attacks on Yulia Tymoshenko headquarters continue in Luhansk. Such attacks took place on 3rd May in the city of Stakhanov and on 4th May in the city of Sverdlovsk. In Stakhanow unknown persons stormed the headquarters, broke all furniture, captured and burnt all the work papers which were found there. The computers were stolen. Also an arson attack on Yulia Tymoshenko campaign headquarters by bottle fire bombs took place in Luhansk and Severodonetsk.
Three cases of attacks on Anatoliy Hrytsenko campaigning tents were recorded in Kyiv oblast. Namely, two times the tents were attacked by drunk individuals, once the electioneer was beaten and another time the director of the local supermarket demanded to liquidate the tent located next to his supermarket.
Also it was reported about the cases of damaging with paint the media advertising M. Dobkin in the electoral districts № 91 and 99 (Kyiv oblast) and Kherson oblast.
In different parts of Kharkiv city and oblast there were attacks on electioneersand tentscampaigning for the presidential candidate Yulia Tymoshenko.
In Khartsyzk, Donetsk oblast unknown persons made an arson attack on Vyacheslav Redko’s office who is the head of the oblast campaign headquarters of the presidential candidate Serhiy Tihipko. Redko has been consistently speaking against separatism and organised the meetings for the unity of Ukraine. The local politician links this incident directly to his own political position. On 15th May Serhiy Nesterov, an election agent of Petro Poroshenko was attacked by a group of armed people in LLC № 57 (Makiivka). Nesterov was injured by non-lethal weapons and received multiple injuries of face and rib fractures. On 8th May the fighters of the so called “Donetsk Peoples Republic” kidnapped Oleksiy Demko an authorized representative of the candidate Oleh Tyahnybok in LLC № 57. Demko was injured, released from hostage and was held hostage again. Currently OPORA observers have no information about location of the authorized representative.