About the website

Answers to frequently asked questions on the site derjivora.org

  • What is this site and where do these numbers come from?
  • How were the elections to the Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg in 2011?
  • What are TECs and PECs? How is the vote counted?
  • How do I know if my vote has been stolen?
  • How is it determined who exactly will become a deputy?
  • What methods of falsification were used in the elections in 2011?
  • Can the election results be challenged in court?
  • What will happen if the deputies of the “opposition” parties give up their mandates?
  • What we can do?

What is this site and where do these numbers come from?

This site is dedicated to the analysis of the results of the elections to the Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg, which took place on November 4, 2011. (We do not say “held” because, unfortunately, we cannot recognize as valid an election whose results were so grossly rigged.) Here are the results of the vote count, reflected in the final protocols of precinct election commissions (PECs), copies of which were issued to observers.

With the help of these protocols, the data in which is often very different from what was entered into the GAS “Vybory” system and issued as a voting result, we can establish:

  • At which polling stations the voting results were falsified and who is responsible for this;
  • Which deputies of the current composition of the Legislative Assembly occupy their seats illegally;
  • What should be the composition of the Legislative Assembly, reflecting the actual results of the vote.

Unfortunately, we cannot take into account in our calculations all other methods of electoral fraud – ballot stuffing, “dead souls” voting, etc. But, as far as we know, it was the rewriting of the PEC protocols that was the most rude and massive method of falsification in these elections, and the availability of copies of the original protocols allows us to make accurate calculations.

This site does not contain any information about the elections of deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, which took place simultaneously with the elections to the Legislative Assembly. The site “ruelect.com” is engaged in collecting information about violations in the elections to the State Duma .

How were the elections to the Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg in 2011?

In accordance with the law , elections to the Legislative Assembly were held according to the proportional system. This means that the residents of St. Petersburg could only choose between political parties. 50 seats of deputies of the Legislative Assembly were distributed among the parties in proportion to the number of votes cast for these parties by voters. In 2011, all seven political parties officially registered in Russia at that time participated in the elections to the Legislative Assembly:

  • United Russia
  • Communist Party of the Russian Federation
  • Liberal Democratic Party of Russia
  • Patriots of Russia
  • Just Cause
  • Fair Russia
  • Russian United Democratic Party Yabloko

Each party was represented by a list of candidates for deputies (not necessarily members of this party), consisting of citywide and territorial parts. The city-wide part included from one to three candidates, the regional part – from 40 to 53. St. Petersburg was divided into 53 electoral territories, and each candidate in the regional part of the list represented one of them. Thus, in the ballots, voters saw the names of its candidates from the citywide part of the list, and one candidate from the territory in which the voting took place opposite the name of each party.

What are TECs and PECs? How is the vote counted?

Elections are organized by election commissions of different levels. Precinct Election Commissions (PECs) organize the direct procedure for voting and counting ballots at polling stations. Their composition (from 7 to 11 people) is formed by territorial election commissions (TECs). Only parliamentary parties (one person per party) have the right to determine who will join the PEC. The remaining members of the PEC are formed from representatives of municipalities and state employees. Based on the results of the counting of votes in the PEC, the final protocol of the election commission is drawn up, which the chairman of the election commission takes to the territorial election commission.

The Territorial Electoral Commission (TEC), usually located in the premises of the district administration, organizes the entry of data into the GAS “Vybory” system and the tabulation of voting results for this electoral territory. Often one TEC is responsible for several electoral territories. Thus, in the elections in November 2011 in St. Petersburg there were only 30 TECs (although there were 53 electoral territories), which included data from 1780 permanent polling stations and about two hundred “temporary” ones (organized “at the place of temporary residence of voters”, e.g. at work).

How do I know if my vote has been stolen?

Find out the number of your electoral territory and precinct election commission (PEC). This can be done here: http://www.spbik.spb.ru/findyikDUMAZAKS2011/ . After that, select the number of your electoral territory here in this form: Territory No. You will see a list of all polling stations located in the given territory and the voting results for them.

The polling stations where the voting protocols issued to observers in the PECs differ from the final data published on the website of the city election commission are highlighted in red. Those voting results that “increased” in the TEC are highlighted in red, those that “decreased” are highlighted in blue. If the number of votes cast in your precinct for the party you voted for is highlighted in blue, it means that your vote has been stolen.

If your PEC is not on the list on our website, it means that we do not have a copy of the protocol from this site, and we cannot verify the accuracy of the data presented on the CEC website.

How is it determined who exactly will become a deputy?

There are 50 seats in the Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg. These seats are distributed among the parties participating in the elections in proportion to the number of votes cast for them. First of all, candidates from the citywide part of the list go to the Legislative Assembly (in the order in which they are reflected in the list), the remaining places are occupied by those candidates from the regional part of the list, in whose territories this party received the largest percentage of votes. Thus, the parties compete with each other for the total number of seats in the Legislative Assembly, and within each party, candidates compete among themselves for the distribution of these seats.

Let’s give an example: let’s say that two parties participated in the elections – the “Predators” party and the “Rodents” party. The citywide part of the list of the “Rodents” party included candidates Zaitsev, Bobrov and Khomyakov, and the citywide part of the list of the “Predators” party included one candidate Volkov. As a result of the elections, the “Rodents” party received 4% of the vote and 2 seats in parliament, and the “Predators” party – 8% and 4 seats. Thus, Zaitsev and Bobrov become deputies from the “Rodents” party; Khomyakov and all territorial candidates from this party remained “overboard”.

The situation with the “Predators” party is more complicated: there one of the 4 seats is occupied by the “citywide” candidate Volkov, and the remaining three are distributed among the “territorial” candidates. Here are the results of the “Predators” party in those electoral territories where it received the most votes:

  • TEC No. 18 – 28%, candidate Lisitsyn
  • TEC No. 5 – 14%, candidate Kunitsyn
  • TEC No. 28 – 10%, candidate Khorkov
  • TEC No. 16 – 9%, candidate Rosomahin
  • TEC No. 11 – 4%, candidate Laskin

Thus, in addition to Volkov, candidates Lisitsyn, Kunitsyn and Khorkov get into parliament. If the candidate Volkov refuses the deputy mandate (which often happens with candidates from the citywide parts of the lists, who are used as “locomotives”), then Lisitsyn, Kunitsyn, Khorkov and Rosomahin will represent the “Predators” party in parliament.
In fact, everything is even more complicated: the number of deputy mandates received by each party is determined not strictly in proportion to the number of votes, but according to the so-called “Imperiali system”. This allows the parties with the most votes to get an additional 1-2 seats due to the fact that the percentage of votes in the elections is not divided by the number of seats. For example, the United Russia party, which received 36.4% of the votes according to official data from the CEC, received as many as 20 seats in the Legislative Assembly.

What methods of falsification were used in the elections in 2011?

The most varied. In general, they can be divided into three categories:

before voting:

inclusion in the lists of voters “dead souls” and temporarily registered (just in time for the election period); so that it was not so noticeable, the lists of voters were organized not by addresses, but by last names in alphabetical order;
the non-inclusion of many people (sometimes even entire houses) in the voter lists;
mass issuance of absentee ballots for voting outside the place of residence;
creating “temporary PECs” (usually in workplaces) and forcing people to vote in them (usually under supervision of superiors and without access to observers).

during voting:

ballot stuffing;
“carousel” (a method of falsification in which the voter is invited to receive a ballot and exchange it for a completed one);
a shortage of ballots that prevented many people from voting;
bribing voters.

after voting:

rewriting the protocols of PECs (sometimes several times) with the subsequent entry of the changed data into the system of the GAS “Vybory”.
Unlike all other types of fraud, this was done not only in order to add the votes of one of the parties (most often United Russia), taking them away from other parties, but also in order to change the ratio of the percentage of votes cast for one party in different territories, and thus get more “convenient” deputies into the Legislative Assembly, even from opposition parties.

Can the election results be challenged in court?

Can. Moreover, it will definitely be done. Already, 95 lawsuits have been filed in the courts, and this is just the beginning. Unfortunately, the courts, as a rule, refuse to satisfy claims under the most surprising pretexts – for example, after the elections it turned out that the CEC quietly made a decision at the beginning of this year, according to which all voting protocols that do not have a register number (namely, such copies of protocols issued to observers) have no legal force. The fact that these copies bear the seals of the PECs and the signatures of their members does not bother the courts for some reason. But so far, representatives of the parties affected by the fraud are determined to do everything in their power to prove the fraud in court.

If the fact of distortion of the will of citizens in some polling station is proved, the court can cancel the voting results for this polling station – they will simply cease to be taken into account, which will lead to a recount of all other votes. If the voting results of more than 25% of the voters who voted are canceled in this way, the elections must be declared invalid.

What will happen if the deputies of the “opposition” parties give up their mandates?

According to the law , if a deputy renounces his mandate, then the next candidate from the list of the same party takes his place. The lists are large (at least 40 people), they contain many little-known people – “technical” candidates from the parties. From the fact that they become deputies, no one will be better off. At the same time, there is no way to force a person included in the list of the party in the elections to surrender their mandate – many of them are not even members of the parties that nominated them.

What we can do?

Support political parties and public organizations that will try to prove fraud in courts and seek the cancellation of election results. This support can be expressed through rallies and other public protests—if they are large enough, the crooks in power may decide it is safer for them to give in. It may be necessary at some point to raise funds to pay court costs.
To disseminate information about falsifications as much as possible, including by name of the chairmen of those PECs where they took place. These people have committed criminal offenses against all of us, and their neighbors, colleagues, relatives and children should know about this.

Spread as much information as possible that the current composition of the Legislative Assembly is illegitimate, and therefore that all decisions taken by them can be canceled at any time on the grounds that their elections were held with gross violations, and the voting results were falsified.

Sign up as observers for the March 2012 elections. Regardless of who participates in them and who wins them, our task is to reverse the tide of fraud and make the manipulation of election results very difficult at first, and then completely impossible.
There were not always frauds in the elections – it was our indifference that led the authorities to decide that our votes are worth nothing and they can be thrown into the trash. Now we have to gradually and persistently convince them that this is not so. This will take time, but it is well within our power.

Let’s take back the right to choose!

Copies of missing protocols and other documents confirming or refuting the facts of falsification at specific sites, you can send to derji.vora@gmail.com . Please include your contact details in the email. We will consider only materials that come from non-anonymous sources.