The supervisor believes that international election observation should be adjusted

MOSCOW, October 30. International election observation must be cleaned of policy and translate on the professional track, amounting to a set of strict rules, according to the Chairman of the CEC of Russia Vladimir Churov.

“It seems to me that the main issue is the depoliticization of the institution of international observation and its transfer to professional rails”, he said at a parliamentary hearing on the international observation of elections in Council of Federation.

According to Churov, “you can and should talk about creating a set of strict rules of the international observation of the elections”. “Otherwise blurred the fine line between respect for democratic norms and interference in the Affairs of a sovereign state,” he explained.

According to Churov, in the international observation of elections dominates politics. “The political component is around 90% of the tasks set before the institutions of the international monitoring of all parties. 90% politics, 10% is the exchange of experience,” he said.

To summarize, it is proposed to be silent

The head of the Russian public Institute of electoral law Igor Borisov supported the proposal Churov. “We believe that the necessary international action, and in the subsequent may and development on its basis of the Russian law on guarantees of the activities of the international observers on elections”, – he said.

According to Borisov, it is necessary, in particular, to prohibit the missions of international observers to publish their applications before the official end of the election campaign in the country. “I believe that the key request of the Institute for international observation, which is now sinking into the political arena, is the creation of uniform standards of international supervision”, – said the expert.

In turn, Director of the Tauride information – analytical center of the Russian Institute of strategic studies, Alexander Bedritsky said that international observers should not be allowed to make statements to the end of the election campaign. In his view, the relevant amendments should be made to international documents regulating the activities of the observers, and Russian Federal legislation.

Now, the political scientist recalled that international observers are forbidden to influence elections, but are allowed to Express their opinion before the announcement of the voting results. “If some international organizations provides pre-trial detention, especially if she does it before the results are voiced by the CEC, it can and should be considered direct interference in the electoral process and influencing the political situation in the country,” – said Bedritsky.

According to him, “such a monitoring mission becomes the main newsmaker and usurps the right of the authority responsible for the conduct of elections, to present the results”.

The observation must be social

The head of the Russian Fund of free elections Igor Bogdanov considers that if Russia does not want to settle for an “electoral tourism”, we need to develop “our observation technology”.

Thus, in his view, the CIS Interparliamentary Assembly “can and should become a professional generator create a universal technology of the international surveillance”. This will allow to involve in the process of observing “the masses of people and NGOs”.

Bogdanov proposed to divide approaches to international election observation on the legal and social. For the legal component must meet the state structures and social – profit organizations.

“Assessment in different groups of observers can be diametrically opposed… Under the legal approach, democratic elections are assessed according to formal criteria and rules spelled out in legislation. Social assessment of the elections based on moral norms and are associated with those parameters that are not defined in the legislation,” he explained.

Bogdanov stressed that the social approach to elections is subjective, but allows you to track such aspects of elections as pressure on voters and election commissions, mass media and so on.