Publications

Articles

THE LEGAL STATUS OF PRECINCT COMMISSIONS IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION: CRITICAL ANALYSIS

© S. A. Khvalev
1. Abstract

The activity of the bodies, whose aim is to ensure the process of periodic renewal of power, is the object of close attention from the society side. And it simply cannot be the other way, since elections based on democratic principles are the basic social need, while the power changed in a civilized way is a condition for the progressive development of all social institutions, a guarantee that everybody is equal before the law, as well as a precondition for a fair division of public wealth. At the same time, in the context of any election campaign both in Russia and abroad, the main burden of responsibility, when we speak about professionalism in the organization of election procedures, as well as legality and reliability of the results of voting, is held by election commissions at the precinct level. In connection with it there is a completely logical question, regarding the basis for the effective operation of these bodies. The effectiveness of precinct commissions is determined by a whole set of factors that have a social and psychological nature (the level of legal awareness and culture, the level of motivation and enthusiasm of commission members), as well as a material and economic nature (fair remuneration for their work, availability of material guarantees). However, in the most cases the general factor of the optimal activity of precinct commissions is the competent and balanced legal regulation of their legal status. The legal status of the precinct commissions is a complex legal category, which includes such parts as: status-preceding element (the legal capacity of commissions, the procedure for organization of these bodies, requirements to the members of such commissions), status element (scope of activities, as well as the basic rights and obligations of precinct commissions), status-resulting element (consequences of inadequate activity of commissions, as well as responsibility of these bodies and their members)[i].

 

[i] S.A. Khvalev. The legal quality of the constitutions (charters) of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation: monograph / Speransky Institute of Legislation and Legal Information; “Law and Democracy” Foundation. - Irkutsk: 2014. P. 21-32.

Thus, incomplete or contradictory legislative regulation of any of these elements of the legal status of precinct commissions brings to nothing any social or material and economic preconditions for professional and efficient work of such bodies. And, on the contrary, the adequate regulation of the status-preceding, status and status-resulting elements of the legal status of the commissions increases their efficiency, as well as the legitimacy and effectiveness of their activities. In this study we are going to consider theoretical and practical problems in the activities of precinct commissions in the Russian Federation, arising because of weak legislative regulation.

2. Keywords: elections, electoral process, electoral system, precinct commissions, electoral body, commission member, status of precinct commissions, responsibility, decision of a commission, voting results.

3. Introduction

In the society based on the principles of representative democracy and the balanced system of public administration, electoral commissions are the main force that guarantees the electoral right, ensures independence, as well as the transparency of the electoral process. Depending on the peculiarities of a society, social, economic and political conditions at each stage of its development, the system of electoral commissions has its own unique characteristics[ii]. However, whatever the model of the system of election commissions is, there is always a need to form a huge frame of electoral bodies that organize the voting process, count votes and set the results of voting at the polling station.

[ii] Lopez-PintorRafael. Electoral Management Bodies as Institution of Governance. New York, 2000. P. 21-30; M.S. Savchenko, D.V. Kudryakova. Legal basis of the activities of election commissions in the Russian State in the pre-revolutionary and Soviet periods: monograph / M.S. Savchenko, D. V. Kudryakova. - Krasnodar: KubGAU, 2016. - 176 p.; A.V. Betin. The role of election commissions in the domestic system of state power (historical and legal analysis) // Newsletter of the Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, No. 5 2009. P. 76-79; D.V. Kudryakova. Formation and organization of the activities of election commissions of the Soviet period of 1936-1988 / Society and Law. 2012. No. 4 (41). P. 58-60; M.S. Salamatova. Electoral Commissions of the RSFSR (1918 - 1936): peculiarities of legal regulation // Historical and legal problems: New perspective. 2014.  No. 10. P. 58-76.

The electoral bodies of the precinct level may have different names: electoral sections, electoral points or a managing board of the polling station[i]. However, regardless of their name, the main task of such commissions is direct interaction with voters on a voting day in order to ensure the implementation of their active electoral rights.
Precinct commissions are the lower level in the system of electoral bodies. But it absolutely does not bring down the level of their functional significance in the scales of the whole electoral system. Some scientists directly say that precinct commissions are the “primary link” in the system of election organizing, however, without which the electoral system cannot function[ii].
Unfortunately, understanding the importance of the activities of precinct commissions did not lead to a proficient and sometimes just well-considered regulation of the legal status of these electoral bodies in the Russian Federation. In our opinion, ineffective federal regulation of the legal status of precinct commissions is a direct reason for the existence of difficult law enforcement problems, conflicts and collisions in the organization and conduct of election campaigns throughout the whole country. For a long time national scientists have been paying attention to the existence of long-standing and very critical problems of the legal status of precinct commissions in the Russian electoral legislation, which are not being solved by the legislator over the years. According to some law enforcement scientists, the problem of a higher level is the fact that the legal status of precinct commissions is not completely regulated at the level of the Constitution of the Russian Federation[iii]. K.M. Mushketov speaks about the need to include in the Constitution of the Russian Federation at least the basis of the legal capacity of election commissions[iv]. However, in this article we are not going to analyze the need for constitutional regulation of the characteristics of the precinct commissions, but we will consider more practical though no less important difficulties deriving from the current legislation, those difficulties which precinct commissions as well as higher commissions face during each election campaign.

 

[i]   E.A. Kadomtseva. Electoral bodies of foreign countries: a comparative legal aspect // “Concept” scientific and methodical online journal - 2017. - B. 39. P. 2316-2320. Https: //e-koncept.ru/2017/970790.htm.
[ii] V.V. Ignatenko. The place and role of precinct election commissions in the system of election commissions in the Russian Federation // The Electoral Law. 2013. P. 46-58.
[iii]N.M. Mironov. The Institute of Election Commissions in Russia: Development Trends and Role in the Electoral Process // Comparative Constitutional Review. 2007. No. 2 (59). P. 48-63.
[iv] K.M. Mushketov. The legal status of election commissions in the Russian Federation: more on the correlation between the norms of constitutional and civil law // The Leningrad Law Journal. 2009. No. 3. P. 57.
Depending on the content, all the problems of the legal status of precinct commissions in Russia, considered in this study, can be divided as follows:
1) the problem of the legal capacity of precinct commissions;
2) the problem of the procedure for updating precinct commissions;
3) the problem of the requirements to members of precinct commissions with the right of decisive vote.

The problem of the legal capacity of precinct commissions
This problem is not a new one. It exists from the beginning of construction of the newest Russian statehood in 1993 and the establishment of the electoral system of the Russian Federation in the form it exists today. The main link of this problem is that the legislator, unfortunately, does not determine the nature of precinct commissions and, as a result, an extremely important issue remains unsolved. It is the place of precinct commissions in the system of public authority in the Russian Federation. In a historical retrospective, it should be noted that neither the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 1557 dated October 1, 1993 “On approval of the revised version of the Regulation on Election of Deputies of the State Duma in 1993 and Introduction of Amendments and Additions to the Regulation on Federal Authorities During the Transition Period”[v], nor Federal Law No. 56-FZ dated December 6, 1994 “On Basic Guarantees of the Electoral Rights of Citizens of the Russian Federation”[vi], as well as in Federal Law No. 124-FZ dated September 19, 1997 “On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in a Referendum of the citizens of the Russian Federation”[vii], and the active Federal Law No. 67-FZ dated June 12, 2002 “On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Rights to Participate in a Referendum of Citizens of the Russian Federation” (hereinafter, Federal Law No. 67-FZ) contain an attempt of the legislator to secure the idea about ​​the nature of precinct commissions.

[v] Collection of the Acts of the President and the Government of the Russian Federation. 10/11/1993. No. 41, art. 3907 (repealed).

[vi] Collection of legislative acts of the Russian Federation, 12.12.1994, No. 33, art. 3406 (repealed).

[vii] Collection of legislative acts of the Russian Federation. 22.09.1997, No. 38, art. 4339 (repealed).

By the way, the issue of securing the legal capacity of precinct commissions becomes more and more relevant, if to note the fact that the legislator eventually determined the nature of the other election commissions. Thus, the Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation is a federal state body, the election commissions of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation function as regional state bodies, the election commissions of municipal entities are granted the powers of municipal bodies. However, speaking about the legal capacity of precinct commissions, the legislative definition of their place in the public administration system has not yet been determined. The only thing mentioned in Federal Law No. 67-FZ regarding the nature of precinct commissions is that these commissions are collegial bodies formed in accordance with the procedure and terms stipulated by law (article 2, paragraph 21).
Scientists and other people engaged in the direct law enforcement of electoral legislation have been trying to solve the problem of the place of precinct election commissions in the system of public administration bodies in the Russian Federation during the years. In terms of matter, all the researchers’ attempts to solve the current problem are limited to a systematic interpretation of the norms of electoral legislation with an attempt to reveal in them the “hidden” nature of precinct commissions. By the way, sometimes such attempts are substantiated. However, in most cases they come down to justification of some “legal chimera”, which absolutely does not fit into the theoretical understanding of the subjects of public relations that are possible and can be covered by the Russian legislation[i].
All attempts of Russian scientists to determine the nature of precinct commissions can be combined into the following groups:
1) precinct commissions are state bodies[ii]. E.I. Starovoytova notes that in the conditions of the constitutionally determined principle of the legality of the activities of precinct commissions, we can speak about the state activity of these entities[iii], i.e. according to this author, the precinct commissions are state bodies. L.D. Volkova refers these commissions to state bodies, since they are “created in accordance with the law, granted state-power competence and operate within legally established forms and methods”[iv].

 

[i] A chimera is a monster in Greek mythology having a head and a neck of a lion, a body of a goat and a tail in the form of a snake. The figurative meaning is something non-existent, unrealizable idea (from the dictionary: http://ozhegov.textologia.ru/definit/himera/?q=742&n=182762)
[ii] I.G. Verzilina. More on the system of election commissions // Newsletter of the Moscow State Regional University. 2013. No.5. B. 2. P. 106.
[iii] E.I. Starovoytova. Implementation of the principle of legality in the activities of election commissions in the Russian Federation // Newsletter of the Speransky Institute of Legislation and Legal Information. No. 1 (28). P. 24.
[iv] L.D. Volkova. The problems of legal regulation of organization and activities of electoral commissions for preparation and conduction of federal elections in Russia. Abstract of  PhD law thesis. Tyumen, 2000. P. 8.
A.A. Makartsev[v] also determines the precinct commissions as state bodies. He notes that the proposal, that the election commissions (of a precinct level) have the status of a state body, is of a general nature, while the reality of such status is specified by the powers they are granted. T.T. Aliev and I.M. Anichkin has approximately the same position, they noted in their work that precinct election commissions can be attributed to state bodies on the basis of formal characteristics of this body[vi]. Y.F. Petukhov defines the election commission as a “government body that has been granted the power”. At the same time, the author notes that a group of citizens who has the following characteristics is meant here: it is formed in accordance with the established procedure; it is authorized by the state to ensure the right of citizens to elect and be elected to the authority bodies; it is endowed with state-power authorities; it operates in accordance with the procedure established by the state; it is a self-sustaining part of the unified system of the Russian state bodies[vii]. In the opinion of S.D. Knyazev[viii] and other scientists[ix], precinct commissions do not belong to any of the three branches of government in the Russian Federation; they are state bodies having an aim to organize and conduct an election campaign;
2) precinct commissions are some unique public bodies that have nothing in common with either state or municipal authorities. Thus, in the opinion of A.A. Veshnyakov, “the legislation on elections and referendums regulates the system of election commissions which are permanently functioning state (and in some cases municipal) bodies at the upper levels … and public bodies at the lower levels”[x].


[v] A.A. Makartsev. The organizational and legal structure of election commissions in the Russian Federation: problems of realization of the legal status // Newsletter of Tomsk State University. Law. 2014. No. 3 (13). Pp. 51-52.
[vi] T.T. Aliev, I.M. Anichkin. The legal status of election commissions in the Russian Federation. // Modern Law. 2012. No. 5. P. 63.
[vii] Y.F. Petukhov. Characteristics of the legal status of an election commission of an entity of the Russian Federation under conditions of reforming of the electoral legislation: Abstract of PhD law thesis. Moscow, - 2003.P. 6,7.
[viii]   S.D. Knyazev. The legal status of election commissions in the Russian Federation: prospects for development // Journal of Russian Law. 1999. No. 10. P. 36-45.
[ix] Electoral Law and Electoral Process in the Russian Federation: the textbook for universities / responsible editor A. A. Veshnyakov. Moscow, 2003. P. 211; I.V. Mukhachev, E.V. Dem’yanov. The concept and constituent elements of the constitutional and legal status of election commissions in the entities of the Russian Federation // Humanitarian and legal research. 2017. No. 1. P. 170; D.G. Demidov. The system of independent election commissions in the Russian Federation: an attribute of democracy realization // News of the Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Hertzin. 2009. No. 118. P. 223.
[x] Report of the central election commission of the Russian Federation “On development and improvement of the legislation of the Russian Federation regarding elections and referendums”. - Moscow, 2000. P. 60.
Other authors[i] note that the Central election commission of Russia, the election commissions of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, territorial election commissions are state bodies, the election commissions of municipal entities are municipal bodies, and other election commissions are public entities endowed with the powers to implement state or local (municipal) tasks. N.I. Ovchinnikov[ii] and I.S. Alekhina[iii] have the same position;
3) precinct commissions are state and public formations. For example, Y.S. Tsvetkova notes that the understanding of the nature of electoral commissions is impossible without taking into account the idea of ​​dialectical unity of the private legal and the public legal in the electoral law[iv]. According to the opinion of N.S. Bondar, “the electoral rights of citizens, as well as the institution of elections in itself, have a certain ... correlation of private and public interest in their basis”[v], in other words, in the opinion of these authors, the precinct commission is an entity which concentrates the interests of both the state and the society;
4) precinct commissions are a form of voters’ self-organization[vi]. According to some researchers, precinct commissions represent a bright prototype of the absolute self-organization of voters[vii].
As we can see, there is no unified opinion in the matters of legal capacity and the place of precinct commissions in the system of public administration. At the same time, there are both simple enough opinions that precinct commissions are state bodies, and rather exotic positions that such commissions are public bodies, as well as even self-governing entities of voters. However, none of the stated approaches is directly based on the norms of the current Russian legislation.

 

[i] Scientific and practical comments to the Federal Law “On basic guarantees of electoral rights and the right to participate in a referendum of citizens of the Russian Federation” / responsible editor A.A. Veshnyakov; scientific editor V.I. Lysenko. - Moscow, 2003. P. 34.
[ii] N.I. Ovchinnikov. The 15th anniversary of the system of election commissions in the Russian Federation // Actual problems of the Russian law. 2009 No. 2. P. 139.
[iii] I.S. Alekhina. The system of election commissions in the Russian Federation // Administrative consulting. No. 4. 2014. P. 132.
[iv] Y.S. Tsvetkova. Election commissions in a democratic rule-of-law state: the notion and characteristics / / Modern trends in the development of science and technology. 2015. No. 2. P. 65-67.
[v] N.S. Bondar, A.A. Dzhagaryan. The constitutional value of electoral rights of the Russian citizens / N.S. Bondar, A.A. Jagarian. - Moscow, 2005. - P. 16.
[vi] T.T. Aliev, I.M. Anichkin. The legal status of election commissions in the Russian Federation. // Modern Law. 2012. No. 5. P. 62-63.
[vii]M.S. Mateykovich, V.N. Suchilin. The Constitution and the status of election commissions in Russia // The State and Law. 2013. No. 12. P. 63.
Under the conditions of the existing legislative vacuum in the nature of precinct commissions, we will try to refer to the practice of the highest courts of the Russian Federation, which are able to cover existing legislative gaps by means of interpretation. As the analysis shows, in the vast majority of cases the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation does not pay special attention to the study of the legal status of precinct commissions. The court uses in its decisions a “short” legislative statement that district commissions are collegial bodies[viii]. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation has a slightly deep approach to the current issue. Since 2002 in some decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation there is the legal position in various contexts of cases under consideration by the court, that commissions of any level, including the precinct level, are authorized for factually publicly-authoritative functions[ix] that impose on them the necessity to compensate and fully restore the voting rights of citizens, especially in case of their violation by election commissions[x].

[viii] Decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 47-G05-12 dated July 6, 2005 // Access to “ConsultantPlus” legal reference system; Decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 4-G05-9 of May 18, 2005 // Access to “ConsultantPlus” legal reference system.
[ix] Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 8-P dated April 22, 2013 “On the case on verification of the constitutionality of Articles 3, 4, Article 134 Part 1 Paragraph 1, article 220, Article 259 Part 1, Article 333 Part 2 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, Article 30 Paragraph 9 Subparagraph “h”, Article 75 Paragraph 10, Article 77 Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Federal Law “On Fundamental Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in a Referendum of Citizens of the Russian Federation”, Article 92 Parts 4 and 5 of the Federal Law “On the Election of Deputies to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation” upon the claims of the citizens A.V. Andronov, O.O. Andronova, О.B. Belov and others, the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation and the regional branch of the FAIR RUSSIA political party in the Voronezh region”// Collection of legislative acts of the Russian Federation. 2013. No.18.  Art. 2292.
[x] Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 1-P dated January 15, 2002 “On the case on verification of the constitutionality of certain provisions of Article 64 of the Federal Law “On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in a Referendum of Citizens of the Russian Federation” and Article 92 of the Federal Law “On the Election of Deputies to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation” upon the claims of the citizen A.M. Traspov” // Collection of legislative acts of the Russian Federation, 11.02.2002, No. 6, Article 626; Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 14-P dated December 26, 2005 “On the case on verification of the constitutionality of certain provisions of Article 260 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian upon the claim of the citizen E.G. Odiyankov” // Collection of legislative acts of the Russian Federation. 2006. No. 3. Article 337; Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 215-O dated July 5, 2003 “On the claim of the citizen Vladimir E. Kostyuchenko about the violation of his constitutional rights by the provisions of Article 64 Paragraph 3 of the Federal Law dated September 19, 1997 “On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in a Referendum of Citizens of the Russian Federation” and Article 59 Paragraph 3 of the Moscow City Act dated July 7, 1999 “On Elections of Deputies in the Moscow City Duma, Mayor and Deputy Mayor of Moscow and Advisers of the District Assembly in Moscow” // Newsletter of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. No. 5. 2003.

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation does not give a direct answer to the question about the nature of precinct commissions. However, we can see that the judicial body is more focused on “pro-government” interpretation of the matter of precinct election commissions when dealing with this problem.
Of course, it can be claimed that the problem of the legal status of precinct commissions is merely theoretical. However, having considerable experience of working in the electoral system of the Russian Federation and facing daily work with the “real” activities of precinct commissions, we share an understanding that the uncertainty in matters of the legal status of precinct commissions is a huge law enforcement difficulty, reflected finally in their actual and total being under control of the executive bodies of state power, law enforcement agencies and local administrations. The current electoral legislation provides the interaction of election commissions with state authorities and local self-government bodies and their officials in matters of ensuring the safety of voters in the voting premises, transport submission, providing logistical support to the activities of the commissions, monitoring the legality of pre-election campaigning, etc. As practice shows, such interaction with public authorities often acquires an exaggerated form, right up to the requirement for direct subordination. For example, not once the precinct commissions received requests from the Russian Prosecutor's Office to submit the voter lists for additional verification and assessment of their quality, information on citizens who systematically do not vote at elections; the precinct election commissions constantly are required from the law enforcement bodies to submit electoral documentation in order to conduct preliminary checks.

At the same time, all this occurs against the fact that Federal Law No. 67-FZ highlights the principle of independence of election commissions and inadmissibility of intrusion into their exclusive competence[i], as well as the fact that the activity of election commissions is not included into the objects of direct prosecutor's supervision according to the Russian Federation Law No. 2202-1 dated January 17, 1992 “On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation”[ii]. An even more outrageous situation takes place during the interaction of precinct commissions with local self-government bodies which illegally require members of such commissions to provide information about the voting process, to determine the results of voting, preliminary submission of unsigned protocols on voting results, etc.

[i] Article 20 Paragraph 12 of the Federal Law No. 67-FZ.
[ii] Chapter 2 of the Russian Federation Law No. 2202-1 dated January 17, 1992 “On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation” // Rossiyskaya Gazeta. No. 39, February 18, 1992.

In this connection, we must agree with extremely cautious and far from mass scale but still existing statements in the scientific and practical literature on the actual “statization” of precinct commissions by means of “successful” attempts to subordinate them to executive bodies of state power or bodies of local self-government[iii]. Unfortunately, but in many cases this is a fact, the independence of precinct commissions is a mere formality, “in practice election commissions ... are becoming less independent and are increasingly turning into interested participants in elections that protect the interests of one party”[iv]. Having lost their independence, becoming an appendage of state authorities and (or) local self-government, precinct commissions start to neglect the equality of rights of some candidates and political parties and, on the contrary, favorably treat others.
Of course, the close connection of precinct commissions with state bodies and local self-government bodies, turning into relations of power and subordination, developed as a result of a whole set of legislative shortcomings. However, in our opinion, in many ways it became possible due to the fact that the legal status of precinct commissions, their place in the system of public administration in Russia is not determined. It is this aspect of the legal status that is fundamentally important when it comes to impartial work of precinct commissions[v]. The definition of the nature of election commissions plays a fundamental role and largely determines the election process itself, the level of securing constitutional rights to elect and be elected, and the citizens’ confidence in the election results[vi]. The legal status of precinct commissions should be determined, strengthened and enhanced not through scientific research or judicial interpretation, but through direct regulation at the legislative level with imposing severe responsibility, at first, on precinct commissions and their members with the right of decisive vote for activities not consistent with the nature of the commissions, secondly, on the subjects of the electoral process unreasonably invading the competence of the precinct commissions, substituting their activities in whole or in part.

[iii] L.V. Rykova. Independence of precinct election commissions as the constitutional principle of their activity // Actual Issues of the Development of Modern Society. Collection of the 4th international scientific-practical conference. 2014 B. 3. P. 387; D.G. Demidov. The system of independent election commissions in the Russian Federation: an attribute of democracy realization // News of the Russian State Pedagogical University named after A.I. Hertzin. 2009. No. 119. P. 226.
[iv] O.V. Mazova. Features of the legal responsibility of the election commission as a legal entity // Journal of Russian Law. 2009. No. 9. P. 130; A.S. Avtonomov. Electoral power. Moscow, 2002. P. 6-7.
[v] E.I. Starovoytova. The legal status of election commissions: the example of the electoral legislation in the CIS countries / / Siberian law newsletter. 2014. 4 (67). P. 132.
[vi] A. Y. Buzin. Problems of the legal status of election commissions in the Russian Federation: PhD law thesis. Moscow, 2004. P. 4.

The problem of the procedure for updating precinct commissions

This problem does not have such long-standing roots as the problem of the legal capacity of precinct commissions. However, it is no less topical.
The scale of the problem of the procedure for updating precinct commissions became most evident exactly in 2018, when the first term of five-year powers of precinct commissions ended.
To get a full image, it is necessary to consider the background of the current procedure for forming the precinct commissions. In accordance with Article 27 of Federal Law No. 67-FZ, which was effective in various editions from 2002 to 2013, precinct commissions were formed by higher territorial commissions during each election campaign. At the same time, the term of office of the precinct commissions, as a general rule, terminated ten days after the official publication of the results of the relevant elections. In other words, precinct commissions did not act on an ongoing basis, their members were determined for specific elections. Everything has changed radically with the adoption of Federal Law No. 157-FZ dated October 2, 2012 “On Amendments to Federal Law “On Political Parties” and Federal Law “On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right to Participate in the Referendum of Citizens of the Russian Federation”[i] (hereinafter, Federal Law No. 157-FZ). The adoption of Federal Law No. 157-FZ is an ambiguous and extremely confusing story. It is necessary to begin with the fact that Federal Law No. 157-FZ was introduced in the form of the draft federal law No. 440300-5 to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in 2010 and the main idea of ​​the initial draft was to change the single voting day in the elections in the Russian Federation[ii]. This edition of the draft federal law No. 440300-5 remained untouched in the Federal Parliament for about two years. During this time, there were only a few insignificant decisions taken on the draft: the decision to submit the draft law to the Council of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, as well as the designation of the responsible committee of the Federal Parliament.

[i] Collection of legislative acts of the Russian Federation. 2012. No. 41. Art. 5522.
[ii] S.A. Khvalev. The concept of single voting days in the Russian electoral Law: reality and possible prospects // The Electoral Law. 2012. No. 3. Pp. 20-24.
However, from April to June 2012 the draft federal law No. 440300-5 was transformed beyond recognition. It included a number of new conceptual changes, among which there were the proposals on the five-year term of office of precinct commissions and the formation of groups of reserve members for precinct commissions on a national basis. This edition of the draft federal law was promptly adopted by the Russian Parliament and signed by the President of the Russian Federation in October 2012. Of course, in such a hurry the draft federal law was not thoroughly discussed in a professional environment, it was not properly assessed in terms of its regulatory impact[iii].
Finally, Federal Law No. 157-FZ, which was published on October 3, 2012, contained two revolutionary provisions concerning the precinct election commissions. At first, it was established that precinct commissions are formed for a period of five years, i.e. function on an ongoing basis. By the way, from the very beginning this innovation was perceived ambiguously. Some academics noted that this new law clearly strengthened the role of precinct commissions[iv] and guaranteed their long-term work[v]. However, practitioners reacted to the innovation clearly skeptical and pointed out that five-year power of precinct commission members will cause a lot of conflicts, for example, in the field of labor activity[vi]. V.V. Viskulova said in a direct way that such a long term of precinct commissions’ office is simply meaningless, there can be no any professional upgrading of their members, since effective training of commission members in the inter-election period on an unpaid basis is impossible[vii].

[iii] The official webpage of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on the Internet (http://sozd.parliament.gov.ru/bill/440300-5).
[iv] I.G. Verzilina. More on the system of election commissions // Newsletter of the Moscow State Regional University. 2013. No. 5. B. 2. P. 104; I.G. Verzilin. Professionalization of precinct election commissions: theory and practice // Newsletter of the Vyatka State University. 2014. No. 1. P. 36.
[v] A.Y. Buzin. Problems of the legal status of election commissions in the Russian Federation: PhD law thesis. Moscow, 2004.
[vi] E.V. Semenova. Actual problems of formation of precinct election commissions // Modern problems of lawmaking and law enforcement. The materials of the All-Russian Student Scientific and Practical Conference. Irkutsk. 2017. P. 77-81.
[vii] V.V. Viskulova. Another attempt to stabilize the institution of elections: whose rights are guaranteed? // Constitutional and municipal law. 2013. No. 7. P. 55-62.
Secondly, an absolutely new institute was introduced: it is groups of reserve members for precinct commissions. This reserve in a simplified form is a database of citizens who meet the requirements to members of precinct commissions and who gave their consent to work in commissions of the precinct level, but for some reasons were not included in the members of such commissions. According to the plan of the legislator, the groups of reserve members for precinct commissions have been introduced and are currently functioning in in order to:
1) timely fill the vacancies in the members of precinct commissions, functioning during five years;
2) increase the professional level of the precinct commission members, by organizing the systematic training in the basics of electoral legislation on the basis of the reserve[i];
3) release the territorial election commissions from the incessant processes of precinct commissions forming before each election at the federal, regional, and municipal levels.
Indeed, the goals are very positive. But the possibility of achieving the goals should be ensured by stipulating optimally adjusted procedures that, unfortunately, did not happen in the case of the groups of reserve members for precinct commissions.
The main mechanism of the groups of reserve members for precinct commissions is that the subjects, recommending candidates for such members (political parties, other public associations, representative bodies of local self-government, meetings of voters), can offer an infinite number of citizens who want to work in precinct commissions. In this case, if these people are not included in the members of the commissions, information on them shall be recorded in the reserve. Thus, if during a five-year term a vacancy has been opened in the precinct commission, it is filled by a person from the reserve. It is a general and the most simplified scheme of filling and functioning of the groups of reserve members for precinct commissions presented. However, such a simplified description is enough to describe the problems of this institute.

 

[i] Paragraph 2 of the Procedure for forming the groups of reserve members for precinct commissions and the appointment of a new member of a precinct commission from the reserve members for precinct commissions approved by Resolution of the Central Election Commission of Russia No. 152 / 1137-6 dated December 5, 2012 // Newsletter of the Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation. No. 12. 2012; Y. A. Lisitsina. The main changes in the electoral legislation during the period from 2002 to 2013 // Newsletter of the Moscow State Regional University. 2013. No. 5. B. 2. P. 39.

All the shortcomings of the reserve for precinct commissions can be included into three main groups:
1) the problem of the lack of a normatively justified interest of citizens to be included in the reserve for precinct commissions. At first, the reserve for precinct commissions in the form in which it is implemented on the territory of the Russian Federation does not guarantee that the people included in it will be among the members of precinct commissions. Statistics show that from 2013 to 2018 the total percentage of moving the citizens from the reserve to the members of precinct commissions was no more than 10-15 percent. Absolute majority of citizens included in the reserve will not have a chance to work in the precinct commissions. Therefore, citizens in the reserve have no motivation to continue to stay there. As a result, people move to another place of residence, become candidates for elective posts, acquire other characteristics incompatible with the status of a member of a precinct commission. Secondly, and it follows from close observations, candidates for inclusion in the reserve, proposed by political parties and public associations, change their political views. After passing a certain period of time, citizens included in reserves from political parties and other public associations do not want to be in it as their representatives. However, under conditions of worsening social and economic situation in the Russian Federation, such political changes in the views of citizens are massive. Eventually, approximately four out of five citizens included in the reserve for precinct election commissions for objective or subjective reasons cannot be appointed to the commission in case of opening a vacant position of a member with the right of decisive vote.
Law enforcement officers paid attention to the above-mentioned shortcomings of the reserve for precinct election commissions as early as in 2013. It was noted that citizens give their consent to the inclusion in the reserves for precinct commissions, and then literally in a short period of time they refuse to work in precinct commissions. Already after the first year of function of the reserve for precinct commissions passed, there were conclusions that this institution is absolutely unviable in the form in which it was proposed[ii].

[ii] A.E. Malinin. Problems of improving the federal and regional legislation on elections and referendums evidenced from the Shchelkovsky municipal district // Newsletter of the Moscow State Regional University. No. 5. B. 2. P. 75-76.
During the election of deputies to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in 2016, as well as the election of the President of the Russian Federation in 2018, almost every precinct commission made protocols on the results of voting with using QR-code technology. Moreover, during the last presidential elections, in order to ensure the transparency of the voting process, video monitoring was used, and it involved setting up optical equipment and monitoring its operation using a certain web portal. It was extremely difficult to ensure the normal work of members of precinct commissions with these technologies. The complexity of this problem is multiplied by the high average age of precinct commission members. Unfortunately, it is often impossible for such people to be able to use these technologies and equipment properly.
It seems that today there is an acute practical need to reconsider the requirements to members of commissions in order to improve the overall quality of the activities of electoral bodies. This is not just a mere theory, but it is an objective necessity, caused by life circumstances, which are related, among other things, to achievements of technological progress.

4. Conclusion

As an conclusion, we would like to note that the role of precinct election commissions in the electoral process should be strengthened, and the legal status of such electoral bodies should be constantly improved, there should not be a long stagnation in this issue, otherwise the electoral system as a whole will lose the ability to resist the administrative resource during elections, as well as to effectively respond to the challenges of constantly developing unfair election technics.