MOVE.BG`s initiative in support of electoral reform "Elections. Direction future" address the fundamental problems with the electoral system in Bulgaria. We asked Vanya Nusheva - political analyst and program director of "Transparency International" association to comment the subject of controlled vote, its direct impact on the election results and possible solutions.
Which are the most common practices for controlling vote during local elections?
"Transparency International" has developed a specific methodology for monitoring the election process in 2009. Then we classified serious violations within four main categories: administrative violations, illegal advertising and campaigning, vote buying, controlled vote.
The last category "controlled vote" coincidentally introduced as a tool for further evaluation of those forms of expression which can not be directly classified as vote rigging. Often they are accompanying a method for verifying the vote, but in recent years we find increasingly clear trend of pressure on voters, even without the use of financial incentives.
How many votes do you expect to be controlled at the forthcoming local elections, if possible at all to make such a prediction?
I think that nobody could do such a forecast, precisely because it is a crime under our Criminal Code. Many practices were refined. We're not so often witnessed that very open exchange of goods, as we were in 2009. What our studies of recent conducted elections show is that about 3% of voters give confirmation that they were pressured to vote certain way.
3% is an indication of a serious impact on voters and electoral process. Here we talk about the results of representative opinion polls. If we compare the results of our direct observation, we can confirm that these data largely correspond with it, indicating that 4% share of the vote is bought. If we add and controlled by other mechanisms vote share may reach 18%. This monitoring is focused on risk sections and the work of local and regional election commissions. Very wide palette of violations. Nobody could say with precision what exactly is their share.
How does the process of controlling elections going?
Votes` controling is done in several stages - during the electoral campaign, at the election day and afterwards. The process of pressures is long and not only occurs at the election day or before. Our observations show that about 2-3 months before Election Day started the process of vote-buying and we can talk about growing practice of pressuring voters without being directly purchased their vote. We talk about relationships, which have a socio-economic nature. Certain people, either because of low socio-economic status, or because of unemployment and low incomes, are under pressure to sell their vote.
Within election day actually control of the voters is carried out by various participants in the electoral process - advocates, representatives of political parties, members of district electoral commissions, and also present on election day persons without certain status, but with a clear, for a experienced observer, function - verifing whether the voters vote, as it was expected of them to do. When talking about local government, we can include another category of persons who directly impact, persons who directly observed what happens in the election process - these are the representatives of local authorities.
Upon completion of the election day it is important to establish how voters cast their ballot.
It is important these actors to engage in the vote counting. They actually establish whether the planned number of votes has came out or not. It must be emphasized that the pressure continues subsequently, especially if the results do not come out right. We are seeing cases of dismissals, threats of assault, cases of mob law also became known in connection with previous elections.
Schemes for putting pressure comply with the specifics of the local community, with the specifics of the social status of people with their isolation from other communities, etc. I can mention the compiling lists of voters, members of their families –control performed by managers or heads of average levels in companies. If there is a well established organization, it can be scrutinized with relative accuracy whether a number of people voting in this section have voted as they were told.
In Roma communities, the pressure is realized thanks to a few vaguely proclaimed community leaders,or of moneylenders - people who provided the loan, and in fact have all the possibilities to provide economic impact.
How crucial is the impact of 3-4 percent controlled voting for the final result of the election?
It wouldn’t be right to make a generalization that elections are rigged, with a similar share of pressure on voters. But you have to recognize that a similar proportion commensurate with the electoral barrier in Bulgaria. You know that our political parties may obtain representation at the national level, if issued on jumped over 4% barrier. Even if you imagine that this brough vote is divided among the various political parties, then surely we can assume that such effects could lead to the introduction of one or other members of parliament, to distortion of election results.
However, when talking about local elections, things change significantly, because the presence of some additional 100 or 200 people can completely change the election results. In some municipalities, we can talk about attempts to capture the institutions of local government. When new voters on the permanent or present address represent 62% of the population who permanently resides in a municipality, then we really can legitimately talk about trying to capture the institutions of local government.
Do you expect to have controlled vote in the conduct of the upcoming referendum?
Since 2009 we observe in detail the electoral process. It is noteworthy that the more direct is the material interest of political parties and the more direct is candidates` access to power, the more active is the pressure of vote-buying.So, referendums are much less charged with risk of putting pressure on voters or directly vote-buying. Comparative data show that in fact exactly the pressure of local elections became the most serious. This is directly related with the ability to access institutions of local government, with direct access to resources for redistribution.
What are the most serious factors that favor the controlled vote?
There are several key factors that determine this high proportion of controlled vote, atypical for our understanding of democratic understanding. Firstly, I want to mention the low socioeconomic status of the Bulgarians. It is a fact that can not be overlooked. Combined with two other factors really lead to a serious increase of risk of vote-buying and controlled vote. The second reason is the way of functioning of political parties in Bulgaria. Many of them fail to do the effectively representation of interests of their voters, their supporters and members.We are witnessing the frustration of voters by political parties. We see a closing party in the narrow circle of party leaders who make decisions motivated by the expectations of their constituents.
There is a gap between the declared intentions and real action. This is the second factor that leads to disenchantment with politics, political parties and all of participation in the electoral process.
The third factor is the specific political culture of the Bulgarian citizens, who don`t see the right of free political choice as an important category, their refusal to effectively protect their civil interests. This creates conditions for expansion of the negative practices.
Can you identify a solution that you think should be used? We know that you proposed a set of measures, but what is most important in order to limit the problems in the electoral process?
I would lay the stress on two things. One is the compilation of voter`s lists in a new way. In recent years we are witnessing an increasing growth gap between the number of voters included in the electoral lists and the actual population living in Bulgaria. If we talk about the first measure on which should focus our efforts, it is changing approach for the compilation of voter`s lists.
We are witnessing the compilation of voter lists based on the register of Civil Registration and Administrative Service. But it was firstly created for other purposes. We need an electoral register which reflects the real picture of people living in the country. This practice will allow a much better functioning of the whole electoral process further, and can lead to limiting the opportunities for manipulation in the election day, carried out by members of the sectional committees - additions voters, instead of voters voting.
The second measure, which we place emphasis on, is changing the way in which they reported election results.
We proposed creation of a regional vote-counting centers - places where in a transparent manner in one common place to count the votes, not from one section, but from several sections within municipalities. This will allow to be considered the vote results as they occur in front of journalists and observers, and not in the electoral areas in which sometimes only members of the Precinct Election Commissions know what is happening.
The fact that votes are counted in such consolidated centers inpacts psychological on voters. They understand that it is possible their vote not to be counted when counting the ballots of an entire community. It is not the same case within a small polling station by 300-500 people, where everybody knows everybody and where it can easily be taken account whether people voted the way that was expected.
Electronic voting creates more opportunities for controlled voting or it prevents such opportunities – how do you think?
It is a matter of technology. I do not think that technology is the factor that drives and defines the participation in electoral process. What the "Transparency International" has focused its efforts in the framework of this campaign, is to inform Bulgarian citizens for arguments in favor of the introduction of electronic remote voting and arguments against the introduction of electronic remote voting on the Internet. We stress at the need for Bulgarian citizens to realize that they have the right to express their opinion and to make informed choices and thus oblige politicians to take measures implementing will of the people.
This article is part of MOVE.BG`s programme in support of electoral reform "Elections: Direction future" " The publication of Handbook for electoral reform is coming in the end of October, but meantime check its page on Facebook.
Photo: BNR
