"Party of Dela" will sue the election commission of Sevastopol

On July 21, the Sevastopol City Election Commission refused to register the list of the “Delo Party” for the elections to the Legislative Assembly of the city. As previously reported, the main reason was a violation, in the opinion of the commission, of the form of the signature list, namely the failure to indicate the data of the first three candidates in the “header”. And it was this point of refusal that became the subject of a heated dispute that flared up between representatives of the “Delo Party” and members of the election commission.

Although the commission initially focused on the presence among the signatories of people who were considered dead, Deputy Chairman Lidiya Basova with expression read out the names of the “dead”.

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at ThereThere, Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube, TikTok и Viber.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

To this end, the authorized representative of the party, Liliya Mamasheva, provided notarized statements of the “deceased” to the Civil Registry Office of the city of Sevastopol and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the city of Sevastopol, in which the signatories asked to “refute the information received from the Sevastopol City Election Commission about my death or provide me with documents confirming my death , and also give me an explanation regarding the current situation and the reasons for its occurrence.” The applicants asked to provide the answer to them personally.

“To refute it with a statement from a notary is probably not entirely correct,” Lidia Basova said to this, without explaining, however, how the signatories can prove the fact of their existence to the election commission.

However, as Basova confirmed, for the party this basis “is not decisive” - the main complaint of the commission concerned the form of the signature list, due to which all 1722 signatures were declared invalid.

– I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the form of the signature sheet for the list of candidates is approved by Appendix 4.1 of the federal law (“On the basic guarantees of electoral rights and the right to participate in a referendum of citizens of the Russian Federation” determines the form of the signature sheet - note) and provides for the indication of surnames, first names and patronymics of the first three candidates,” she said.

The application does determine the form of the signature list, confirmed Lilia Mamasheva, but it implies that the first three candidates are indicated only if there is a so-called regional part of the list. And it was precisely this issue that led to the entire further discussion in the Sevastopol list of candidates.

– Please name a specific norm from the law of the city of Sevastopol, where it is stated that the list contains a regional part? A specific norm,” Liliya Mamasheva addressed the chairman.

– I don’t understand what this has to do with you! – Basova was indignant.

– You are refusing to register us with a marriage of 1,5% that we admitted with a possible 10% (Party Dela had 26 signatures recognized for other reasons out of a possible marriage of 172 signatures – approx.) precisely because we did not indicate the first three candidates, which is indicated if there is a regional part. I ask: where in your law does it say that there is a regional part in the city list? – Mamasheva asked again.

– Where in the federal law does it say that if the list is not divided into parts, then the first three candidates are not indicated? – the deputy chairman retorted.

“In footnote 2 of Appendix 4.1,” the party representative responded to this. “I can read it to you: “If one or two candidates are included in the regional part of the list, the last names, first names, and patronymics of these candidates are indicated. If the region-wide part of the list of candidates is missing, the words “at the head of which are” in the signature sheet, the corresponding line and the interlinear text to it are not reproduced.” So: please tell me where in the Sevastopol law the regional part is mentioned? Refer to a specific rule of law!

- Show me the article! - they shouted from the hall.

To this, Sergei Danilenko suggested stopping asking questions, since “you can ask for a very long time,” and said that members of the commission may not answer party representatives if they do not want.

“This reminds me of a Beaumarchais play,” he complained. – If there is no union under this blot...

– I apologize: the chairman of the commission called the federal law a blot? - Secretary of the Federal Council of the “Delo Party” Alexei Lapushkin could not stand it. – And he can’t name the article of his own regional law that talks about the region-wide part?

Then the dispute turned into a formal squabble: Sergei Danilenko accused Lapushkin of “distorting” and asked in what capacity he was present at the commission meeting. The latter showed the identity of an authorized representative.

– Signed, by the way, by you, Mr. Danilenko. Apparently, you also have problems with memory,” Lapushkin chuckled.

“Yes, senile dementia,” said the chairman.

Sergei Danilenko refused to answer further questions, threatening that he would call representatives of the Russian Guard to restore order. However, by the time law enforcement officers appeared in the building of the Sevastopol election commission, the meeting had already ended.

Upon its completion, Alexey Lapushkin promised Danilenko “to meet in court” - representatives of the “Delo Party” intend to appeal the commission’s decision.