Local elections in Belarus proved once again that the authorities of Belarus have separated the society, ordinary people from the state. No matter how strong the support for democratic anti-government candidates is election commissions protected by the executive power and bad legislation come out with the predetermined results. Apathy, disillusionment and despair in the society are growing. How could people who blame the authorities for soaring prices (utility services became almost 500% more expensive in 2002), social security and medical services crisis, growing unemployment and wage and debt arrears vote for the candidates of these authorities? The authorities held the elections virtually without any control of the civil society or international community. The institute of observation has been turned into a meaningless procedure as 1) observers can not observe the whole process on the ground, 2) they can not control counting of votes and 3) election commissions do not have the obligation to issues protocols and sign them when counting is completed and results announced. Thus in spite of active participation of democratic political parties and independent candidates the authorities blocked their entrance into the system of legislative power on the local level. Though these bodies in Belarus have little power the central government wanted to demoralize representatives of the civil society and convinced the public that they fully control the situation.  

Apart from the reasons mentioned above the results of the local elections were predetermined by the following factors:

-         no changes in election legislation have been made after parliamentary and presidential elections of 2000 and 2001. Recommendations of ODIHR and democratic political parties of Belarus were ignored;

-         democratic parties and civil society representatives were denied participation in election commissions at all levels;

-         early elections and location of election stations at enterprises where people voted under supervision of their direct employers;

-         unequal access of candidates from democratic parties and civil society to mass media;

-         refusal to register many candidates from democratic parties and civil society and withdrawal of many candidates during the election campaign;

-         absence of adequate and working procedure to question decisions of the election commissions in court (in fact lack of independent judiciary). Election commissions commonly refused to show protocols to observers and candidates after counting of votes was finished;

-         complete subordination of election commissions to the executive power. There were cases when directors of enterprises whose workers took part in the elections were called by Oblast Executive Councils with demands to force these candidates to withdraw.  

The authorities began to act more rudely after the elections. At present over 20 people who took part in demonstrations are in prison. They were sentenced to short terms in prison for allegedly violating the rules of holding demonstrations. Among those arrested are representatives of political parties (including Belarusian Popular frond leader V. Vyachorka), United Civil Party and social democratic parties. Police changes the tactics of neutralizing demonstrations. At this point organizers and leaders of political parties are caught by policy before the demonstration actually begins. On March 23 about 50 persons were detained. 10 of them were sentenced to short terms in prison (10 – 15 days). And on March 25 (National Freedom Day) another 9 persons were sent to prison. Some of them did not even take part in the demonstration. Thus the authorities want to make the best use of the situation when attention of the international community is drawn to Iraq and tighten their grip over the Belarusian civil society.

All in all 1672 local councils were elected. Democratic opposition parties (social democrats, liberals and communists) won about 150 mandates. The pressure on non-authority candidates was unprecedented. In most of constituencies (especially village and small town level) there was just one candidate. Out of 24100 deputies 23469 were elected. 5214000 votes took part in the elections (73.4% turnout). 44.4% of elected deputies are women, 7.15% - young men and women under 30. 34.85% of elected deputies work in agriculture, 19.06% of deputies work in the sphere of education, culture and science. 14.82 – are employed by various state bodies. 12.48% work in industry and communication and 8% - in health system. There are only 0.75% of entrepreneurs in local elections and 2.2% - are unemployed. With few democratic party candidates in local bodies of power they are going to work together to promote values of the European community and to foster changes in the Belarusian society. An Interregional Deputy Group was formed to ensure exchange of experience, to establish communication with party structures and NGOs and to shape agendas of local councils all over the country.  

A few typical cases

Central Election Commission sent to the Prosecutor’s Office documents on violation of election legislation in Malininski constituency in the city of Minsk. The election commission in this constituency declared that the elections did not take place due to low turnout (allegedly 49 votes were lacking to 50% obligatory turnout). But Deputies of the Chamber of Representatives Mr. Frolov, Mr. Novosyad and Mr. Parfenovich stated that there was contradiction in numbers provided by election commissions of different levels. The independent candidate has been “stolen” 600 votes. The case is still under investigation but it is highly unlikely that a criminal case will be opened against members of the election commissions.

In Mogilyov Vladimir Gaidukov, a representative of the United Civil Party, managed to go through to the second round of the elections to the City Council. The local authorities held the second round during the week and did their best to prevent people from voting. When there saw that the turnout was too small for the elections they decided not to falsify the results. After counting of votes the party candidate got 85% of votes running against the representative of the authorities.

In Vitebsk another opposition party candidate was winning in the second round. The authorities panicked and at 7 p.m. policy came into the polling stations and ordered journalists and observers to leave the places. As a result a representative of the authorities won. In cities where opposition parties’ candidate had active campaigns their support before the elections was about 60%. Quite a few of sure winners were withdrawn from the elections on the stage of early voting. Others could not question official results declared by regional and central election commissions. In fact the authorities used a kind of four layer sieve to block democratic non-authority candidates: 1) at the stage of initial registration of candidates, 2) during the campaign allegedly for violation of election legislation and forced withdrawal of candidates; 3) on the day of lection in the first round (counting procedure) and 4) in the second round of the elections (no turnout, counting).  

Mixed results of the local elections 

One of the most obvious positive results of the local election campaign was that the mood of the people had changed. The authorities are so much afraid to show weakness that they ignored even the fundamentals of democracy and election procedures. The authorities did not even try to play according to the rules set forth in the legislation. At the same time they have failed to calm down the society and made people believe that everything was OK. The local elections showed growing distrust of people both in cities and in the country side in ability of the government to handle social and economic problems of the country in general and their local communities in particular. Polls held by independent candidates showed that they had about 60 – 80% support in urban constituencies where they were registered. The society is still at a loss but this state is distinctly different from the mood after presidential elections in 2001. Democratic non-authorities candidates won but they can not prove it and defend their victory.

  Another outcome of the elections is that the authorities have failed to show any program or strategy of development of the country and self-governance. There is no institution of local self-government in Belarus. All councils and local executive bodies work based on the following main premises: 1) there are always financial and resource perks available for members of the “vertical line of power), 2) local bureaucrats have the right to give perks to their subordinates and to businesses (there are 26 regional and local taxes and fees and local bodies of power have the right to manipulate fiscal burden on enterprises); 3) stable employment for families and friends (nepotism). 4) the right to distribute central budget resources on the local level and to deal with local monopolies. These are powerful factors that keep the system of local government almost completely impenetrable to representatives of democratic parties and the civil society. Local bureaucrats are beyond control of the society and they made the best use of it fudging any elections. There is a kind of a silent deal between the local authorities and the presidential administration to serve each other’s needs and peacefully co-exist cementing the arbitrary power over ordinary citizens and businesses.  

What should be done

The international organizations were not invited to observe the elections. US Embassy representatives who requested to observe the election were denied tit. The elections over OSCE Office in Minsk has not analyzed its results with representatives of the civil society and political parties yet. Formally the Office was opened in January 2003 and there is growing concern among democratic political parties that it does not have a clear agenda for improving the situation in Belarus.   We observe two tendencies that shape the framework of the situation in Belarus. It is obvious that support for A. Lukashenko’s regime is decreasing which is accompanies by growing anxiety of the population. The other tendency is that the support of democratic structures, mass media and NGO in Belarus is waning. The message of democratic structures is appealing to people but they do not have funds and means to reach ordinary people.  

It is obvious that election legislation in Belarus is far from international standards set by Council of Europe, EU and OSCE. It is crucially important now for all forces and structures that are interested in democratization in Belarus to exert pressure on the Belarusian authorities to make the following changes:

-         to cancel the procedure of early voting as it is a major source of violation of principle of openness, transparency of elections;

-         to include representatives of democratic political parties and civil society structures into election commission of all levels;

-         to change rules and procedures of counting so that observers can really observe the whole process of elections;

  -         to exercise control over the procedure of making ballot papers and over the composition of lists of voters;

-         to control use of resources by all candidates including the candidates favored by the authorities;

-         to ensure equal access of all candidates to mass media (both electronic and papers).;

-         to stop prosecution of political party activists and journalists;

-         to pass a new media law that meets PACE standards.  

If no changes are made then the next parliamentary elections in Belarus in autumn 2004 will be another scam in which Belarusian citizens are denied the right to elect and to be elected. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe can be instrumental in democratizing Belarus after the local elections. To do that Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe should

-         provide assistance (training, information, visits to Belarus etc.) to newly elected deputies of local councils especially those with democratic and self-governance agenda. It is important to get them involved in various joint projects and shape agendas of local councils in Belarus based on the best practices of countries of PACE;

-         intensify the work of sub Committees on Belarus (Political and Legal Affairs and Human Rights Commissions) and hold regular visits to Belarus to monitor the situation and to propose changes to the election legislation;

-         hold an international conference on the situation in Belarus in the context of the implementation of the new EU program “New Neighbors”;

-         hold hearings on the situation in Belarus in the autumn PACE plenary session (with invitation of representatives of political parties, NGOs and Belarusian authorities). A resolution with recommendation for Belarusian authorities should be passed and concrete deadlines should be indicated;

-         hold sittings of PACE subcommittees on Belarus in Minsk with participation of all parties of the political process;

-         urge international and national donors to support the structures of civil society in Belarus (education, training, economic and social development, poverty reduction etc.) and independent mass media in Belarus;

  -         propose and promote the idea of setting up an ad hoc group (commission) on Belarus at the European Commission in Brussels to coordinate activities of different international organizations and national governments to promote democracy and rule of law in Belarus.

In conclusion it should be stated that the authorities had missed another opportunity to move closer to PACE standards in the local elections campaign in Belarus. They seem to ignore the decision of the PA of OSCE to sit the Chamber of Representatives in this institution. Neither human rights situation nor media nor civil society participation in decision making process has improved or changed. Moreover there is enough evidence to say that without active involvement of European institutions, national governments and civil society structures of the West and East the situation in Belarus can deteriorate even further.