On December, 06, 2020, the city of Kryvyi Rih will have the second round of mayoral elections. The ballot paper included Dmytro Shevchyk (“Servant of the People”) and Kostiantyn Pavlov (“Opposition Platform – For Life”) who gained 25.94% and 9.15% of votes, respectively, on October, 25. The incumbent city mayor, a candidate Yuriy Vilkul (Vilkul Block “Ukrainian Perspective”) won the biggest support in the elections (44.96%) but he withdrew from the second round. The candidate explained his decision by his health condition, and encouraged to support the self-nominated candidate from the “Opposition Platform – For Life” Kostiantyn Pavlov.

Electoral Code foresees the second round in the cities with 75,000 voters or above to accept two top candidates, provided none of them gained over 50% of votes. If a candidate withdrew from the candidacy before the ballot paper final text is approved the repeated voting accepts the next candidate with the following largest number of votes. Yuriy Vilkul submitted an application withdrawing his candidacy before the final approval of the ballot paper and let Kostiantyn Pavlov “take the lead.” Therefore, voters from Kryvyi Rih will be choosing between the candidates scoring second and third at local elections on October, 25, 2020.

Peculiarities of setting the date for the repeated voting

Kryvyi Rih TEC appointed the repeated voting at mayoral elections with substantial breach of timelines set by the Electoral Code (November, 12, in place of November, 06). Failure to meet the deadlines for establishing voting results was due to the court appeals on the possible violations of electoral law by proxies of a candidate Dmytro Shevchyk (“Servant of the People”). Most lawsuits were lost by the candidate’s lawyers in courts, including the appellate instances, but in one case the court obliged the city TEC to consider a complaint from the candidate’s proxy. Upon the completion of judicial proceedings, the repeated voting was scheduled and candidates have been enabled to lawfully campaign for themselves.

OPORA observers provide for the long-term and short-term observation over the repeated voting at elections of Kryvyi Rih city mayor. On the day of repeated voting on December, 06, 2020, the organization’s observers will stay at 60 polling stations selected on the basis of representative sample for the hromada. OPORA will have a possibility to assess the quality of election procedures during the voting process and the vote count. At 12 o’clock, and at 7 p.m., on December, 06, 2020, the official OPORA page on Facebook and its YouTube channel plan the live streaming of the organization’s representatives on the interim observation results in the city.

The course of election campaign by mayoral candidates of Kryvyi Rih

OPORA observers registered the large-scale and intense campaign in the city of Kryvyi Rih, despite the limited terms and the reduced number of participants. The decision of one front-runner in the first round to withdraw from further race changed the configuration of the political confrontation, and also induced the reconsideration of the campaigning messages and the methods to interact with different target audiences of voters. Although the epidemic situation was rather complex, candidates did not avoid the direct campaigning activities. However, since Dmytro Shevchyk caught the COVID-19, it was impossible for him to have personal meetings with voters in the final weeks of the campaign. According to observers, candidates did not fully follow the anti-epidemic requirements when campaigning. Therefore, they posed unnecessary risks for voters who attended the public events.

Candidates were massively using the outdoor billboards to place their campaigning materials, and also shared them through a network of street tents. Another popular campaigning format was to share the materials in the region’s printed media. Moreover, observers also pay attention to multiple cases of publishing the materials with elements of covert political advertising, which is against the law and democratic standards of campaigning. In particular, some covert campaigning in favour of Kostiantyn Pavlov was reported in the outlets of “Vechir” (lit. - The Evening) and “Moya Domashnia Hazeta” (lit. – My Home Paper).

In the context of general information dissemination and mobilization of voter support, the role of television channels is key but the efficiency and transparency of the impact is neutralized in terms of the covert nature of political ads; besides, personal preferences in covering the candidates’ public activities were shown by various media and their supporters.

In Kryvyi Rih, the debates failed between Dmytro Shevchyk and Kostiantyn Pavlov, although the regional public broadcaster planned to have a discussion between the candidates. According to Dnipro public broadcasting company, Kostiantyn Pavlov sent a formal withdrawal from participating in the scheduled debates, while Dmytro Shevchyk and his representatives did not reply to the TV provider’s invitation. The candidates’ refusal from the direct discussion on the future of the city, according to OPORA, is a negative practice that limits the possibilities of voters to scrutinize and compare the agendas of mayoral candidates. Regretfully, but in most cities holding the repeated voting, candidates did not have the debates between themselves, except for Lutsk, Lviv, Cherkasy, and Chernivtsi. According to OPORA, in the context of further discussions on improvements of electoral law, the Parliament shall find the regulation model that would motivate candidates at local elections to participate in direct debates. The development of direct debates practices organized by independent broadcasters is an important precondition for the expression of citizens’ will.

A severe challenge of the campaign is in the unregulated content and form of the election campaigning administered by candidates and their supporters on the Internet, and the non-transparent nature of expenses for such events.

Social Media Campaigning of Candidates

Before the repeated voting at mayoral elections in Kryvyi Rih, an especially active election campaign on Facebook was promoted by the candidate from the “Servant of the People” party Dmytro Shevchyk. Since November, 1, the politician has published on Facebook 59 promoted posts worth over USD 7,500 (over UAH 210,000). The proactive support was also coming from the “Zelenskyi Team – Kryvyi Rih” page that posted 75 more posts, worth USD 8,000 (UAH 228,000). Along with the campaigning posts encouraging to support the candidate, the page also shared the promoted post with a video address of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyi to the citizens of Kryvyi Rih.

A candidate from a political party “Opposition Platform – For Life” Kostiantyn Pavlov spent for campaigning on the social media of Facebook USD 4,154 (about UAH 120,000). Yuriy Vilkul who officially supported Kostiantyn Pavlov on social media posted one ad only, where he campaigned for the candidate, and spent therefor over USD 300 (UAH 8,550). A much more active support for the candidate was coming from the news agency “Media-KR #КривойРог” whereas they published promoted posts showing signs of the made-to-order effort. In addition to the hidden campaigning for Kostiantyn Pavlov, the media was also actively criticizing Dmytro Shevchyk.

According to observers, the officially set expenses incurred by candidates for the political ads on the Internet can hardly reflect the full picture of financing the campaign on social media and through various Internet resources. Besides, some posts were actively shared on Facebook that were promoted and showed signs of black PR and disinformation against both candidates. However, as compared to all campaigning posts, their share and the amounts spent therefor are insignificant.

This campaign is peculiar in engaging public figures and organizations for promotion. Thus, they showed their support to candidates, either directly, or indirectly. OPORA hereby highlights that the practice is acceptable when the support is voluntary and comes from institutions and groups of people that do not show any signs of abusing the formal status and powers of public figures for campaigning purposes. However, the identified cases of campaigning in favour of candidates do not imply that the requirements have been fully followed.

Episodes with Elements of Breaking the Law and Electoral Standards

OPORA observers note the random cases of direct violation of electoral law by mayoral candidates in Kryvyi Rih. Specifically, participants of the repeated voting did not usually break the legal requirements on producing, disseminating, and placing the campaigning materials. However, the election campaign in the city shows that public authorities and the elected officials failed to follow democratic standards of the functioning of public administration during elections.

A large share of public activities of a candidate Kostiantyn Pavlov was presented as the activities of an advisor to the current city mayor. The official website of Kryvyi Rih city council reported his statements on a daily basis, wrote about his meetings with work teams, and sessions on current and strategic activities of the local self-government. During the election campaign, Kostiantyn Pavlov dealt with issues of energy provision, public transport, water supply, and other aspects, which is the de facto election campaign he conducted.

Standards to combat abuse of administrative resources provide for the uninterrupted current operations of authorities in the situation of elections but it shall not be accompanied with the specially created newsworthy events to cover the advantages of the candidate holding a public position. On the other hand, the actual empowerment of the city mayor’s advisor, a member of executive committee of the city council, and also a candidate, Kostiantyn Pavlov, with the powers to manage the city testifies to the politically biased grounds for the uncommon functioning of the local self-government. In particular, OPORA observers do not have any knowledge of the reasons to concentrate public activity of the city council around the city mayor’s advisor who is running for the elections.

During the election campaign, an incident was documented with signs of abuse of administrative resources in favour of the candidate Dmytro Shevchyk (“Servant of the People”). On November, 26, during the official meeting attended by the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyi, on the environmental conditions in Kryvyi Rih and on the development of the city, the head of state wished Dmytro Shevchyk to win at the elections. The candidate’s participation in the official event that was broadcast on the official page of the Presidential Office could be formally related to his position in the “Central Mining and Refining Facility” PJSC. However, using the official event for the de facto campaigning shows signs of breaking the law and the good standards of activities of authorities in the context of elections. In terms of this episode, the address of the President of Ukraine to voters of Kryvyi Rih on the last Friday before the election day aimed at mobilizing the voters, although the head of state did not directly campaign.

The pre-election promises to raise the amounts of social welfare payments to the under-privileged groups of voters or the introduction of new budget programmes were actively voiced by candidates during the election campaign; some of them also included expressed signs of abuse of administrative resources. Observers identified the outdoor political advertising for the candidate Kostiantyn Pavlov that communicated the promise to increase the amount of social payments to certain categories of citizens, from UAH 500 to 1,500. According to the democratic standards of elections, establishment of new social payments during elections or the respective promises create the preconditions for abuse of administrative resources by the candidates who also hold public positions. On the other hand, the candidate Dmytro Shevchyk also resorted to promises to raise social welfare payments in case he is elected. On a separate note, candidates did not duly inform their voters that the final decision on raising the respective social welfare payments depended on the city council deputies.

During the election campaign, Kostiantyn Pavlov also made many statements on allocating budget funds for certain city programmes or projects. In particular, the official website of the city council’s executive committee of Kryvyi Rih informed local citizens on the large-scale procurement, at the cost of city budget, of the antivirus lamps for medical facilities. Some time before, it was informed that the candidate had transferred to medical facilities a pilot lot of the equipment,  which funding source has not been identified by observers. 

OPORA urges the mayoral candidates of Kryvyi Rih to refrain from any attempts to abuse the administrative resource for personal advantage. It is of prime importance to prevent any technologies of unlawful mobilization of voters that are exercised through administrative influence.

The same as during the repeated voting in other cities of Ukraine, in Kryvyi Rih, candidates or groups of their supporters applied the technology of “black” PR or shared the designedly unveracious information about their opponents. The increased role of social media in local election campaigns included the sharing of anonymous negative and provocative information on the candidates. The fact that opponents organized the negative information campaigns in the situation with no direct debates among them was not conducive to the high quality and comprehensive informing of voters but resulted into misleading them (such as through the publication of fake results of opinion polls). 

The course of election campaign in Kryvyi Rih has indicated yet again to the need to enhance the mass media operational standards during elections as they shall not break the law or give the preferential attention to electoral actors. The campaigning process during the second round in Kryvyi Rih was accompanied with lawsuits from candidates against the mass media. The candidate Dmytro Shevchyk filed a lawsuit for being rejected of the airtime for political ads financed from the election fund at the “Rudana” municipal channel. Upon considering the case, the Dovhyntsivskyi district court of Kryvyi Rih committed the “Rudana” television and radio company to conclude an agreement with the candidate on posting political ads. Dmytro Shevchyk also filed a lawsuit requesting to refute the information published by local broadcaster “The First City Channel. Kryvyi Rih.”

According to OPORA, the media’s due abidance by legal requirements to cover elections depends not only on the application of formal sanctions, but also on the position of media community.  The identified issues shall inspire the professional dialogue on new approaches, both on formal, and on practical levels, and lead to an efficient and unbiased coverage of the election process by the media.

Activities of Territorial and Precinct Election Commissions

Activities of territorial and precinct election commissions are highly transparent and open but in the conditions of time pressure for the repeated voting and wirthdrawals and replacements of commission members (also because of contracting the coronavirus disease), there have been issues with the legal capacity of meetings and the timely abidance by the timelines of all election procedures. According to observers, there have been massive replacements of the PEC members as it is impossible for many commission members to perform their functions (over 400 PEC members have been replaced). It has a negative impact on the overall level of professional capacity of election administration. The candidates for commission members previously delegated from the parties that are no longer the electoral actors lack the interest or incentives to continue their work. In particular, the commission members have been withdrawn without replacement by the "Proposition" party and the "For the Future." Thus, on the day of repeated voting, commissions are going to work in fewer numbers than during the so-called first round. At the same time, observers do not see any serious threat in the under-staffing of election commissions or in blocking their operations for the lack of quorum on the election day of December, 6. After all, most election commissions have been composed in the near to maximum membership.

The current situation with replacements and withdrawals of commission members before the repeated voting shows yet again the need to have a broad discussion and to review the current approaches to compiling election administration bodies in Ukraine.

Recommendations on the Repeated Voting at Elections of Kryvyi Rih City Mayor and on Establishing Voting Results

With account for the issues detected during the election campaign in Kryvyi Rih, and the experience of the repeated voting in other cities, OPORA drew the recommendations on good practices to organize and conduct the voting on December, 06, 2020.

To Kryvyi Rih City Council, and the executive committee

  • To avoid any interferences into the course of repeated voting, to provide for control over abidance by the rules of election law by heads of municipal companies and budgetary organizations.

To candidates for the mayoral position

  • To counteract any attempts of unlawful mobilization of voters or to control the expression of will engaging the administrative pressure or through another unlawful way.
  • To avoid any campaigning events beyond the timelines set by the Electoral Code, also any covert campaigning on social media and on the outside boards.
  • On the election day, to not share the knowingly false information about the opponents, also through anonymous sources, and to avoid sharing the disinformation on the course of voting and the vote count.

To Territorial and Precinct Election Commissions

  • To fully comply with the anti-epidemic requirements when conducting the sessions, and during the voting process, securing the personal safety and showing good practices for voters.
  • To prevent cases of issuing ballot papers to voters failing to present due IDs or trying to vote in lieu of their family members or other persons. This unacceptable practice is common at elections in Ukraine, which is confirmed by the findings of OPORA observation, and by official data from law-enforcement and judicial authorities.
  • To be proactive in responding to attempts of voters to photograph their filled ballot papers, which, as shown during the repeated voting on November, 22, in 11 cities, may be a sign of the voter bribery technology.
  • To prevent the production of adjusted vote count reports at polling stations other than at the PEC sessions, or with other breaches of the law.
  • To create the conditions for official observers for the exercise of their lawful rights, to actively respond to attempts to illegally restrict their activities.
  • To compile a backup list of candidates for the precinct election commissions for the event of deliberate withdrawal of commission members by their nominating entities, or in a situation of the lacking quorum required for the due organization of operations.

To the National Police of Ukraine

  • To pay special attention to the possibility of applying unlawful technologies of controlled voting and voter bribery (such as those that could include voters taking photos of their filled ballot papers).
  • On the local and national levels, to promptly inform the media and the public on the implemented measures to counteract violations, which is a restraining factor for electoral subjects.
Analysis of court rulings on bringing to responsibility for offenses at the 2020 local elections in Ukraine

In this report, OPORA also separately analyzed the peculiarities of re-hearings at the 2020 local elections in Ukraine and the interim results in bringing election law-breakers to administrative and criminal liability. According to OPORA, from September, 5, to December, 3, the Unified State Register published 1,207  rulings on cases of bringing persons to administrative or criminal responsibility for electoral fraud. 630 cases (52%) resulted into the established liability for the offenders; on 270 cases (22%), the materials in the proceedings were sent for further investigation. The production or dissemination of campaigning materials without the source data, breaking the procedures of posting campaigning materials, breaking the restrictions on running the campaigns were a dominant issue in the cases of bringing electoral offenders to justice at the 2020 local campaign.

According to OPORA, 7 more criminal offenses have been transferred to the stage of judicial preliminary procedure. On the other hand, they published a new sentence on the illegal transfer of ballot papers to a person at elections of Medenychi township head of Drohobych district, Lviv Oblast, and to district and township councils.

Cases of Bringing to Administrative Liability

Over the period from the start of election process, September, 5, to December, 3, the Unified state register published 1,207 rulings on cases of bringing to administrative and criminal liability for electoral administrative fraud. In particular, over the last week, the judicial register has added 130 rulings.

In 22% (270 cases), the materials were sent for further investigation (for proper finalization). In 52% (630 cases) cases had guilty verdicts. In other cases, the proceedings were dismissed on the absence of the event of the crime and the elements of administrative offence.

Most cases were traditionally considered under Art. 212-13 of the CUAO (production or dissemination of printed campaigning materials with no required data, 621 cases), under Art. 212-14 of the CUAO (breaking the rules for posting campaigning materials, 335 cases), and under Art. 212-10 of the CUAO (breaking the restrictions on conducting the campaign, 162 cases).

Substance of the administrative offence

Article of the CUAO

Number of proceedings considered by the court

Breaking the rules set by the law to keep the State Voter Register

 212-7

29

Violating the citizen right to get acquainted with the data from the Unified State Voter Register, with the voter list

 212-8

0

Breaking the rules set by the law to run the pre-election campaigning employing the mass media

212-9

49

Breaking the restrictions on pre-election campaigning

212-10

162

Failure to provide the opportunity to publish the reply on the information shared about an electoral subject

212-11

0

Breaking the right to use the facilities during the election campaign

212-12

4

Producing or disseminating printed materials of the pre-election campaign that do not contain the necessary data

212-13

621 cases (of them 75 under combined Art. 212-13, 212-14)

 

Breaking the rules for placing campaigning materials

212-14

335 (of them 75 under combined Art. 212-13, 212-14)

Breaking the rules for providing or receiving financial (material) support for the exercise of pre-election campaigning

212-15

15

Ordering or producing ballot papers exceeding the established number

212-16

0

Failure to provide the copy of a voting protocol

212-17

0

Failure to fulfil the decision of election commission, a referendum commission

212-18

0

Refusal to dismiss an election commission member from the performance of operational or official duties or his ungrounded dismissal from work

212-19

0

Breaking the rules for publishing documents related to the preparation and conduct of elections

212-20

27

Breaking the rules for submitting financial statements on arrival and use of election fund, party report on the assets, income, expenses, and financial liabilities

212-21

72

Public disclosure by voters, referendum participants of voting results in the polling premises

212-22

 30

Damaging, hiding, destroying of one’s election ballot, referendum ballot, or taking it outside the polling station

212-23

 83

Obstruction to the exercise of voting rights or rights to participate in the referendum, or to activities of electoral subjects, referendum subjects

212-24

 11

Over the period of local elections, courts have not considered a single case under Art. 212-8 of the CUAO (violating the citizen rights to get acquainted with the data from the Unified State Voter Register, with the voter list), Art. 212-11 of the CUAO (failure to provide the opportunity to publish the reply on the information shared about an electoral subject), Art. 212-16 of the CUAO (ordering or producing ballot papers exceeding the established number), Art. 212-17 of the CUAO (failure to provide the copy of a voting protocol), Art. 212-18 of the CUAO (failure to fulfil the decision of election commission, a referendum commission), and Art. 212-19 of the CUAO (refusal to dismiss an election commission member from the performance of operational or official duties, or his ungrounded dismissal from work).

As usual, the period after the election days sees the number of cases under Art. 212-22 (public disclosure by voters at elections, referendum participants of voting results in the polling premises); presently, the register includes 30 such cases; and 83 cases under Art. 212-23 (damaging, hiding, destroying of one’s election ballot, referendum ballot, or taking it outside the polling station).

Remitting the materials for further investigation

The trend has been relevant for courts to remit about 30% of materials on administrative offence for further investigation (finalization) to police.

The Supreme Court of Ukraine held correct the practice of judges who use the reasonable ruling to remit protocols on administrative offence drawn in breach with the rules of  Art. 256 of the CUAO, to the relevant law-enforcement body for proper finalization (par. 24 of the Resolution of the Plenum of Supreme Court of Ukraine of 23.12.2005 No 14).

It shall be pointed out that improper completion of paperwork for the voting protocol and the attached materials may serve as the ground for dropping the proceedings on a case for the absence of the event and elements of administrative offence. At the same time, dismissing the administrative proceedings may result in ruling illegal the actions of officials who initiated and executed the proceedings (such as in part of drawing the protocol, detaining a person, receiving explanations) and in compensating for the moral damage (Resolution of the Supreme Court on the case No 640/16169/17).

The analysis of 270 rulings for the period from September, 5, 2020 (the starting day of election process) to November, 30, 2020, highlights several typical reasons to remit the materials of the case for further investigation that could be grouped under the following criteria:

1. Drawing the protocol in breach of Article 256 of the CUAO.

Thus, the protocols on administrative offence do not include the data on:

  • day and place of drawing the protocol;
  • position and full name of a person drawing the protocol;
  • data on the person brought to administrative liability;
  • place, time of commission, and the substance of administrative offence, no breached legal provision is mentioned from the electoral law of Ukraine;
  • addresses of witnesses and victims, if any;
  • explanations of a person brought to administrative liability;
  •  other data required for the resolution of the case.

2. Issues with the legal capacity of the authorized police staff (Art. 255 of the CUAO) to draw the protocol.

3. Issues with identifying the jurisdiction of the court the case shall be subject to (pursuant to part 1 Art. 276 of the CUAO, cases shall be considered under the location of their commission).

4. Issues with qualifying the types of offence.

Cases of the second and third return for further investigation

On cases No 279/5359/20, No 346/4617/20, No 130/2508/20, No 425/2831/20, No 492/1276/20, No 310/8282/20 , No 472/1081/20414/2200/20, No 414/2199/20, No 356/556/20,   the materials were remitted for further investigation for two times.  In particualr, on a case No 458/956/20  the protocol stated that a person had not been brought to administrative liability, according to the "ARMOR" database, but there has been no evidence attached; the protocol had an empty disc with no recordings thereon. Moreover, on a case  No 346/4114/20 the court remitted the materials for further investigation for two times. However, during the third consideration, a person was held guilty of administrative offence.

On cases  No 414/2181/20, No 328/2012/20, No 425/2920/20 , the court remitted the materials for further investigation three times; currently, the consideration has not completed yet.

Consideration of cases upon remitted and further investigated materials

In most situations, on the cases on administrative offence considered by courts after the return of the finalized documents, the proceedings were closed on the grounds of the absence of event and elements of an administrative offence. Thus, in the process of finalization, the national police cannot usually correct the shortcomings produced on the first stage of drawing the protocols and materials of administrative proceedings. Thus, cases No 234/14065/20, No 234/14066/20, No 234/14067/20 were remitted for further investigation as the protocols do not have the body of administrative offence committed by a person, or any evidence confirming the fact that the person was responsible for the dissemination (spreading, posting, handing out) of printed materials during the election process. On cases No 713/2005/20, No 713/2006/20, the materials were remitted for further investigation because of corrections in the protocols.

Published decisions (for the period since November, 24) on criminal proceedings related to the violation of voting rights

  1. Obstruction to an official observer to exercise the voting rights or the rights to participate in a referendum, in the work of election commissions or referendum commissions (Art. 157 CCU):
  • On a case No 369/15003/20 under criminal proceedings No 12020110410000610, under part 3, Article 157 of the CC of Ukraine, a preparatory session was appointed.
  1. Providing untruthful information to the administration body of the State Voter Register or other unsanctioned interference in the work of the State Voter Register (Art. 158 of the CCU) – on 2 proceedings, a preparatory session was appointed:

- On a case No 334/6864/20 (proceedings No 12020080050002559) and on a case No 334/6861/20 (proceedings No12020080050002844) under part 1, Art. 158 of the CC of Ukraine.

  1. Illegal use of a ballot paper, referendum ballot, a voter voting over one time, stealing, damaging, hiding, or destroying a ballot paper (158-1 of the CCU)

- A verdict on a case No 442/7169/20 of Drohobych district court of Lviv Oblast, under part 3, Art. 158-1 CC on illegal issuance of ballot papers to a person to vote at the elections of deputies to Drohobych district council, Lviv Oblast, at elections of Medenychi township head and the deputies to the township council. It shall be noted that the verdict included several mistakes, such as a reference to the provision of the Law of Ukraine on local elections that ceased to be in force, and a mistake was made in the date that was corrected by the court ruling of November, 26.

  • On a case No 723/4864/20 (proceedings No 12020260150000716) a preparatory session was appointed.
  • On a case No 309/3099/20 under criminal proceedings No 12020070050000788, a ruling was approved which content is unknown as it was prohibited for publication since it included information subject for the closed consideration in the court or closed procedures to protect it (par. 4, part 1, Article 7 of the Law of Ukraine "On Access to Court Decisions").

4. Falsification, forgery, stealing, damage or destruction of election documentation, referendum documentation, stealing, damaging, hiding, destroying a stamp of an election commission or referendum commission, or a ballot box, a voter roll, or a referendum roll (Art. 158-3 of the CCU):

  • Preparatory sessions appointed on cases No 321/1496/20 (proceedings No 12020080290000280), No 456/4884/20 (proceedings No12020140130000918) on a charge for four people in each case for the group of people signing a vote count protocol before it was fully completed, or signing it other than at the commission session (part 1 Art. 28, part 1 Art. 158-3 of the CC of Ukraine); on a case No 450/4117/20 (proceedings No 12020140270000999) under part 2 Art. 158-3 of the CC of Ukraine, a preparatory session was appointed.
  • On a case No 358/1404/20, of Bohuslav district court of Kyiv Oblast, under criminal proceedings No12020110090000368, under the elements of the crime covered in part 1 Art. 158-3 of the CC of Ukraine, following the statement from the Bohuslav mayoral candidate on the falsification of voting results, a ruling was issued to dismiss the claim for temporary access to items and documents, since an investigating officer failed to mention in the claim anything about the relevance of the above-mentioned documents for the establishment of the circumstances under criminal proceedings; besides, no evidence has been provided for sufficient grounds to believe that the documents listed in the claim, by themselves, or as combined with other items and documents of the criminal proceedings, covered by the claim, are of the essence for the establishment of important circumstances under criminal proceedings; therefore, the claim shall not be satisfied.

- On a case No 358/1271/20 (proceedings No 12020110090000354) under the constituent elements of the crime covered in part 1 Art. 158-3 of the CC of Ukraine, in response to a report that a paper envelope was found in the polling station that contained unfilled protocols of precinct election commissions, the Bohuslav district court of Kyiv Oblast ruled to satisfy the claim to seize the original copy of the adjusted vote count protocol at the polling station.

- On a case No 372/3985/20 under criminal proceeedings No 12020110230001574 of 15.11.2020, under the constituent elements of the criminal offence covered in part 1 Art. 158-3 of the CC of Ukraine, in response to the report from journalists about the alleged forged documents and denied access to police to enter the precinct election commission where the mentioned facts have been detected for examination and seizure. Obukhiv district court of Kyiv Oblast satisfied the claim on temporary access to the alleged forged ballot papers that were admitted as subjects of the case.

5. Breaking the procedures for financing political parties, election campaigns or referendum campaigns (Art. 159-1 of the CCU) –  1 ruling:

- On a case No 712/11420/20 under criminal proceedings No 12020256010000550 as to PERSON_1 under the charge of commission of a criminal violation covered by part 2 Art. 159-1 of the CC of Ukraine, on November, 24, Sosnivka district court of Cherkasy Oblast ruled to appoint a court hearing for December, 04, 2020.