Irina Molchanova
Vote Rigging Caused No Harm to Voters
Moskovskii Komsomolets
June 8, 2012
[Moskovskii Komsomolets in Petersburg] continues to monitor the scandalous story of blatant ballot rigging during the presidential election at Polling Station No. 1769 in the Central District [of Saint Petersburg]. Election commission members had their cover totally blown by a video posted on the web site Gosuslugi.ru. [Polling station] election commission chair [Tatyana] Ivanyuk and her deputy [Natalya] Atamanyuk clearly and audibly discuss “forging signatures” [in the video]. The sensational video reached the Smolninsky District Court, where Georgy Budny, a member of the [polling station] election commission who had discovered a “shortage” of votes, filed a suit. The court’s decision was no less sensational: the case was dismissed because, according to Judge Tatyana Matusyak, the rights of voters had not been violated. That is, by this logic, the vote rigging (the fact that it took place is not questioned) caused no harm to citizens.
“Don’t worry, guys!”
This paradoxical ruling was, to say the least, surprising and strange. For Judge Matusyak had demonstrated her resolve at the previous hearing: she had summoned the heroines of the video, Ivanyuk and Atamanyuk, to appear in court, and had requested that the video itself be brought so that she could view it right in the courtroom. For this purpose, Georgy Budny procured a video projector and, after setting it up, waited for the judge to order him to show the most contentious part of the video, which includes such incriminating remarks as “We’ll take [votes] away from Mironov, Zhirinovsky, Prokhorov. 54 percent. Uh-huh,” “We have to redo everything,” and “We have to forge all the signatures.” But Judge Matusyak pretended not to notice the projector. It was not used at all [during the hearing].
Ivanyuk and Atamanyuk, who had been subpoenaed, did not produce themselves in court. Instead, a representative of the city election commission came [to the hearing]: he immediately declared that there was no legal point at issue because the rights of citizens had not been violated! According to him, only presidential candidates can request that the vote tally records from Polling Station Election Commission No. 1769 be invalidated, while ordinary voters whose votes were stolen as a result of vote rigging cannot do this because, allegedly, their rights were violated in no way. And Judge Matusyak fully supported his conclusion!
“This is complete nonsense,” said an outraged Georgy Budny. “It turns out you can show the whole country how votes are rigged, how the original vote tally records are torn up and buried in the bottom of a trash can (this is also visible in the video from Polling Station No. 1769 of the Central District – Editor) without any consequences for the vote riggers! After all, the rights of citizens have not been violated. But the Constitution (Article 32, Paragraph 2) clearly states that ‘citizens have the right to elect and be elected.’” But Judge Matusyak rejected [Budny’s] right to elect. After this court ruling, the words uttered by Polling Station No. 1769 chair Ivanyuk on election night (immediately after [the phrase] “forge all the signatures”) take on a frightening sense. “I have a super team!” says an overjoyed Ivanyuk, who works as a teacher at the children’s art center Transfiguration during the electoral off-season. “Don’t worry, guys. Everything will be okay. Well guys, good luck!”
25 Cases in the Courts
Smolninsky District Court has set a dangerous precedent. Now any instance of vote rigging cannot be challenged because it allegedly did not violate the rights of voters. A court hearing on the scandalous video will take place only in the event that one of the presidential candidates files a lawsuit in defense of his rights. In our case, this [would be] Mikhail Prokhorov, from whom exactly fifty votes were stolen at this polling station and given to Vladimir Putin. This was discovered the morning after the election, when Georgy Budny compared copies of vote tally records with the figures posted on the St. Petersburg Election Commission web site. A similar discrepancy in numbers was recorded at many polling stations. Now, according to Petersburg NGO For Fair Elections, around twenty-five cases of vote rigging on March 4 are being considered in the northern capital’s civil courts.
Georgy Budny has no intention of giving up. He is preparing an appeal to the City Court and has already appealed to Mikhail Prokhorov, via his web site, asking Prokhorov to send him a letter of attorney empowering him to represent Prokhorov’s interests in court. But the candidate has so far not responded.
Editor’s Note. Thanks to Comrade S. for the heads-up.
chtodelat news 