Nine Possible Ways of Cancelling Elections

Those believing that the December elections for the State Duma will be held for certain are mistaken. Although the electoral campaigning is developing, there are still plenty of ways to cancel the elections. Such a possibility is seemingly proved by the presidential decree of September 17 which postponed the elections of the heads of regional legislatures and administrations until December 1996-June 1997. The explanation that this is needed for completing the development of a legal electoral structure in the regions and implementing the principle of "people power" do not sound persuading in legal terms. There could be different ways of cancelling or torpedoing elections. First, the government could postpone elections on the ground of political or economic instability, natural calamities, or terrorism. However, there are also softer methods of attaining this goal. Well-thought out tactics could result in all the electoral coalitions' and political parties' failure to overcome the 5% qualification threshold. In that case elections will have to be conducted again. The time before the elections could be used for holding presidential elections or conducting a referendum on extending the President's term. Third, forged reports on elections and sabotage by election commissions could result in the voters' attendance in many districts being below the required 25% mark. Fourth, elections results could be forged in favor of the pro-presidential and pro-government forces. Fifth, the government could just refuse to recognize the elections results. Alleged internal contradictions of the election legislation or large-scale violations of it could serve as an excellent pretext for that. Sixth, the government could recognize the elections results, though virtually refuse to implement them. The convocation of the Duma session could be postponed until elections are held in all regions. Seventh, the elections results could be recognized, though the State Duma might in reality be boycotted. By appointing his candidate as the acting Prime Minister, the President would do without the State Duma's approval. In this event, the lower chamber would hardly launch impeachment procedures, bearing in mind the imminent presidential elections to be held in the autumn of 1996. Eighth, the newly-elected State Duma could be dissolved on one pretext or another. Depending on the pretext, the West's reaction would be more or less sharp. Ninth, the most sophisticated way would be to let the State Duma paralyze its own work. The Federation Council - the parliament's upper chamber which will consist of the heads of regional legislatures and administrations - would side with the federal government, which is certain to result in a protracted conflict with the lower chamber. Under these circumstances, the President could refer to the parliament's impotence as a pretext for its dissolution.