The 2007 snap parliamentary elections in Volyn were held in accordance with current legislation – the conclusion of the Civil Network OPORA and AMoRe

The OPORA Civil Network is a non-partisan nationwide network of activists and civic organizations.

The report was prepared by a group of long-term observers who worked in all territorial election districts of the Volyn region. Previous monitoring reports of the OPORA Civil Network can be found on the website www.opora.org.ua

The Volyn representation of the OPORA Civil Network and the NGO "Association of Young Reformers" believe that the 2007 early parliamentary elections in Volyn were held in accordance with current legislation, and the obtained vote count results reflect the electoral preferences of Volyn residents.

OBSERVATION CONCLUSIONS: BASED ON THE OBSERVATION RESULTS, OPORA STATES:

1. Election day in the Volyn region passed without serious obstacles; the recorded facts of non-compliance with election legislation were few in number and insignificant, and therefore did not affect the voting results.

2. Volyn residents demonstrated high civic awareness by coming to polling stations and taking part in voting. Voter turnout in the Volyn region was 70.46%. Voters demonstrated a high level of political culture; at most polling stations no conflicts or other facts of disturbance of public order were observed.

3. At almost every polling station, cases were recorded where, due to errors and inaccuracies in the voter lists, such as the failure to include certain persons at their place of residence, failure to include persons who had recently turned 18, inclusion under old surnames of women who had changed their surname, exclusion from the list of persons based on information from the Border Service, voters were unable to exercise their constitutional right. The estimated number of such persons is 6-9 thousand.

4. No serious and systemic violations were recorded on election day in the Volyn region. Only in certain populated areas was the presence of campaign materials of various parties and blocs noted, which occurred due to shortcomings of municipal services (for example in the town of Lyuboml).

5. Precinct election commissions on election day generally coped with their duties, properly organizing their work and providing voters with the opportunity for free expression of will. Only in isolated cases did commission members incorrectly interpret the Law and refuse to give ballots to voters who were included in the voter list but whose passport contains a registration mark that differs from the information about the place of residence in the corresponding column of the list. Such cases occurred at every third precinct election commission in the city of Lutsk.

6. During the vote count, commission members conducted an honest count of the votes cast for each party; accordingly, no complaints or lawsuits regarding incorrect vote count results were identified in the region. However, more than half of the precinct election commissions made errors in drawing up the protocols on the vote count. Mainly, information was incorrectly entered regarding the number of spoiled ballots and the number of ballots found in each ballot box. Because of this, precinct election commissions had to return to the polling station after delivering the election documentation to the district election commission and draw up corrected protocols.

7. The district election commissions, despite the large volume of work, generally coped with their duties on election day. Commission members worked in a coordinated manner; no conflicts between representatives of different parties were recorded. At the same time, during the acceptance of protocols and election documentation from precinct election commissions, district election commission members did not always work in an organized manner, which is why this procedure lasted until 2 October.

8. The district election commissions conducted an honest count of the voting results. No serious errors or violations were identified during these procedures.