Instituto de Estudios Políticos y Derecho Público "Dr. Humberto J. La Roche"
de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas de la Universidad del Zulia
Maracaibo, Venezuela
Publicación cientíca en formato digital
ISSN-Versión Impresa 0798-1406 / ISSN-Versión on line 2542-3185
Depósito legal pp 197402ZU34
ppi 201502ZU4645
Vol.40 N° 75
2022
Recibido el 05/08/22 Aceptado el 11/10/22
ISSN 0798- 1406 ~ De pó si to le gal pp 198502ZU132
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas
La re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas, es una pu bli ca ción aus pi cia da por el Ins ti tu to
de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co “Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che” (IEPDP) de la Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas de la Uni ver si dad del Zu lia.
En tre sus ob je ti vos fi gu ran: con tri buir con el pro gre so cien tí fi co de las Cien cias
Hu ma nas y So cia les, a tra vés de la di vul ga ción de los re sul ta dos lo gra dos por sus in ves-
ti ga do res; es ti mu lar la in ves ti ga ción en es tas áreas del sa ber; y pro pi ciar la pre sen ta-
ción, dis cu sión y con fron ta ción de las ideas y avan ces cien tí fi cos con com pro mi so so cial.
Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas apa re ce dos ve ces al año y pu bli ca tra ba jos ori gi na les con
avan ces o re sul ta dos de in ves ti ga ción en las áreas de Cien cia Po lí ti ca y De re cho Pú bli-
co, los cua les son so me ti dos a la con si de ra ción de ár bi tros ca li fi ca dos.
ESTA PU BLI CA CIÓN APA RE CE RE SE ÑA DA, EN TRE OTROS ÍN DI CES, EN
:
Re vicyhLUZ, In ter na tio nal Po li ti cal Scien ce Abs tracts, Re vis ta In ter ame ri ca na de
Bi blio gra fía, en el Cen tro La ti no ame ri ca no para el De sa rrol lo (CLAD), en Bi blio-
gra fía So cio Eco nó mi ca de Ve ne zue la de RE DIN SE, In ter na tio nal Bi blio graphy of
Po li ti cal Scien ce, Re vencyt, His pa nic Ame ri can Pe rio di cals In dex/HAPI), Ul ri ch’s
Pe rio di cals Di rec tory, EBS CO. Se en cuen tra acre di ta da al Re gis tro de Pu bli ca cio-
nes Cien tí fi cas y Tec no ló gi cas Ve ne zo la nas del FO NA CIT, La tin dex.
Di rec to ra
L
OIRALITH
M. C
HIRINOS
P
ORTILLO
Co mi té Edi tor
Eduviges Morales Villalobos
Fabiola Tavares Duarte
Ma ría Eu ge nia Soto Hernández
Nila Leal González
Carmen Pérez Baralt
Co mi té Ase sor
Pedro Bracho Grand
J. M. Del ga do Ocan do
José Ce rra da
Ri car do Com bel las
An gel Lom bar di
Die ter Nohlen
Al fre do Ra mos Ji mé nez
Go ran Ther born
Frie drich Welsch
Asis ten tes Ad mi nis tra ti vos
Joan López Urdaneta y Nil da Ma rín
Re vis ta Cues tio nes Po lí ti cas. Av. Gua ji ra. Uni ver si dad del Zu lia. Nú cleo Hu ma nís ti co. Fa-
cul tad de Cien cias Ju rí di cas y Po lí ti cas. Ins ti tu to de Es tu dios Po lí ti cos y De re cho Pú bli co
“Dr. Hum ber to J. La Ro che”. Ma ra cai bo, Ve ne zue la. E- mail: cues tio nes po li ti cas@gmail.
com ~ loi chi ri nos por til lo@gmail.com. Te le fax: 58- 0261- 4127018.
Vol. 40, Nº 75 (2022), 145-163
IEPDP-Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas - LUZ
Electoral corruption: illegal voter
bribery technologies
DOI: https://doi.org/10.46398/cuestpol.4075.10
Adrii Vozniuk *
Mariia Hryha **
Iryna Botnarenko ***
Tamara Makarenko ****
Oksana Bryskovska *****
Abstract
Based on the methodology of documentary review of scientic
sources, materials of public organizations, law enforcement
and judicial practice of investigating cases of voter bribery,
the most widespread technologies of electoral corruption in
Ukraine and other countries were revealed and investigated in
the article. Peculiarities of direct and indirect voter bribery have
been discovered. The most widespread forms (technologies) of
election-related bribery have been identied: “carousel”, “bargaining”,
“conditioning”, “bus”, “dumping”, “election network technology”. It has been
established that the most insecure technology that poses a serious threat
to the smooth conduct of elections is the creation of “election networks”,
which can signicantly inuence and undermine the credibility of the
will of citizens. It is concluded that the characteristics of such a criminal
network are: massive character involving a wide range of participants with
dierent roles; signicant territorial distribution; realization of criminal
intent through clearly planned step-by-step activities within a temporary
criminal group. Based on the results of the research, it has been established
that in Ukraine the “carousel” technology has been widely used.
Keywords: electoral corruption; electoral technologies; voter bribery;
criminal oense; criminal investigation.
* Doctor of Legal Sciences, Head of the Research Laboratory at the National Academy of Internal Aairs
(Kyiv, Ukraine). ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3352-5626
** Candidate of Legal Sciences, Senior Researcher of the Research Laboratory at the National Academy of
Internal Aairs (Kyiv, Ukraine). ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4561-712X
*** Candidate of Legal sciences, Senior Researcher of the Research Laboratory at the National Academy of
Internal Aairs (Kyiv, Ukraine). ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4697-3767
**** Associate Professor, Dean of the Faculty of Humanities and Economics at Berdyansk State Pedagogical
University. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2893-7789
***** Candidate of Legal Sciences, Senior Researcher of the Research Laboratory at the National Academy
of Internal Aairs (Kyiv, Ukraine). ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6902-9969
146
Adrii Vozniuk, Mariia Hryha, Iryna Botnarenko, Tamara Makarenko y Oksana Bryskovska
Electoral corruption: illegal voter bribery technologies
Corrupción electoral: tecnologías ilegales de soborno a
los votantes
Resumen
Con base en la metodología de revisión documental de fuentes cientícas,
materiales de organizaciones públicas, aplicación de la ley y práctica judicial
de investigar casos de soborno de votantes, se revelaron e investigaron
--en el artículo-- las tecnologías más extendidas de corrupción electoral
en Ucrania y otros países. Se han descubierto peculiaridades del soborno
directo e indirecto de votantes. Se han identicado las formas (tecnologías)
más extendidas de soborno relacionadas con las elecciones: “carrusel”,
“negociación”, “condicionamiento”, “bus”, “dumping”, “tecnología de
redes electorales”. Se ha establecido que la tecnología más insegura y que
representa una seria amenaza para el buen desarrollo de las elecciones es la
de creación de “redes electorales”, que pueden inuir signicativamente y
socavar la credibilidad de la voluntad de los ciudadanos. Se concluye que las
características de dicha red criminal son: carácter masivo que involucra una
amplia gama de participantes con diferentes roles; importante distribución
territorial; realización de la intención delictiva mediante actividades paso
a paso claramente planicadas dentro de un grupo delictivo temporal.
Sobre la base de los resultados de la investigación, se ha establecido que en
Ucrania la tecnología de “carrusel” se ha utilizado ampliamente.
Palabras clave: corrupción electoral; tecnologías electorales; soborno
de votantes; ofensa criminal; investigación crimina.
Introduction
Democracy is the main value of the international community,
supporting democracy, humanity promotes human rights, development,
peace and security. Democracy promotes good governance, monitors
elections, supports civil society to strengthen democratic institutions and
accountability, ensures self-determination in decolonized countries, and
security (Kalynovskyi et al., 2022).
Constant transformation processes in a state-organized society stipulate
the need to adapt activities in the eld of organizing and holding elections
to government bodies to changing conditions. One of the key directions of
such adaptation is the transformation of the system-structural approach
and the improvement of the functional-purposeful organization of such
activities (Keshikova and Demeshko, 2021).
The use of corrupt election technologies (the so-called “electoral
corruption”) completely nullies principles of direct popular government
147
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 75 (2022): 145-163
and provides an opportunity for the corrupt elite, as well as criminal and
semi-criminal structures, to directly inuence formation of representative
bodies of state power, and for the dishonest politicians – to dispose of
signicant public resources. Corruption in election process is a rather
dangerous phenomenon, since as a result of corrupt relations realistic
political competition is revealed, corruption of future representatives of the
legislative and executive authorities is laid, the level of trust decreases the
process of power formation through elections, thus ultimately creating a
real threat to the national security of any given state. Electoral corruption,
the institutional mechanism of which lies in the abuse of various kinds of
administrative resource of public authorities of dierent levels, serves as a
starting point for political corruption in general.
Elections are often “overshadowed” by various types of violations,
including distortion of the results of popular will. According to the
information of the database of political institutions (DPI), which contains
statistical data on some 181 countries, facts of fraud, falsication and even
intimidation of voters have been recorded in about 20 percent of the last
elections to the executive power bodies (Asunka et al., 2013). Therefore,
study and improvement of mechanisms for countering criminal attempts
to disrupt the election process are extremely urgent and important task not
only in Ukraine, but also around the world.
Manifestations of electoral corruption can be divided into three groups:
a) limiting the voter’s ability to express his preferences by implementing his
voting rights; b) manipulation of election results during or after elections
without any direct intervention with voters; c) cooperation with voters in
the organization and implementation of illegal actions during the election
process.
According to Yuriy Orlov, the forms of manifestations of electoral
corruption are: a) bribing voters; b) bribery of election commission
members for the purpose of falsifying election documents; c) corruption
agreement regarding obtaining a suitable (so-called transit) place in
electoral list of the party (political bloc) (Orlov, 2016). This list is further
extended by V. Sokurenko by referring to violation of the procedure for
nancing political parties (Article 159-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine)
(Sokurenko, 2017).
Corruption in our state can be compared to the ongoing war in Ukraine
(Vozniuk, et al., 2021). The negative consequences of corruption have been
repeatedly discussed in the context of negative consequences of corruption
(Carson and Prado, 2016; Mykhailov, 2020). Corrupt technologies
and practices not only impede economic and social development, they
also prevent democracies from normal functioning. Citizens in corrupt
democracies can nd it unnecessary or unable to establish credible relations
with their representatives.
148
Adrii Vozniuk, Mariia Hryha, Iryna Botnarenko, Tamara Makarenko y Oksana Bryskovska
Electoral corruption: illegal voter bribery technologies
As a result, citizens can distance themselves from the political system,
believing that it is better to stay at home on Election Day (Stockemer et al.,
2013). The inuence of political corruption makes respondents refrain from
voting more often. On the other hand, democracy itself reduces corruption
(Kolstad and Wiig, 2016) and democratic elections play a decisive role in
stamping out corruption (Vries and Solaz, 2017). Democratic elections are
called to prevent corrupt politicians from getting into oce. In practice,
however, corrupt politicians are often elected to state seats in elections.
Moreover, one of the reasons for this is bribery of election ocials.
According to M. Ivanov and Y. Davidenko, the reasons for bribery of
election ocials are deeply rooted in the history of elections in Ukraine.
The modern socio-economic and political instability in Ukraine, according
to scientists, contributes to the fact that citizens do not object to donations,
free concerts, receiving certain amount of money during election campaigns,
thus selling their votes to one or another candidate, assuming that in such
way they receive at least some benet from him (Ivanov and Davidenko,
2019).
Until recently, countering such criminal oenses has been a signicant
problem in Ukraine, and were also found to be deciencies in the legislative
regulation of the consolidation of criminal liability for such oences. Thus,
prior to the amendments to Article 160 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine
(“Bribery of a voter, referendum participant, member of the electoral
commission or the referendum committee”), sanctions of part. 1 of the Article
did not entail deprivation of liberty, so investigators could not prosecute a
person under Article 208 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which
signicantly complicated documentation of such proceedings.
Moreover, according to the previous wording of Art. 160 of the Criminal
Code of Ukraine, the act of bribing a voter by means of a proposal, or by
giving an unlawful warning (part 2) was considered a crime of medium
gravity, which substantially limited investigator’s procedural possibilities
in the part of conducting secret investigative actions. For comparison: in
Australia, for instance, electoral bribery is the most serious political oense:
according to Articles 326 and 362 (1) of the Electoral Act (Commonwealth
Electoral Act) of 1918, even one candidate’s request (proposal) to bribe a
voter nullies his or her election (Orr, 2005).
With the adoption of the Law of Ukraine “On Amending Certain
Legislative Acts of Ukraine to improve the election legislation” № 805-
IX of 16.07.2020 (Law of Ukraine, 2020), the situation in this aspect has
changed. At the same time, the lack of sucient experience of investigators
in the investigation of such criminal oenses in the conditions of frequent
updating of the legislative framework and the lack of proper methodical
support for such investigations, taking into account the latest changes, is
evident. The low eectiveness of the investigation of voter bribery is also
149
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 75 (2022): 145-163
evidenced by the data of ocial statistics. Thus, it is worth pointing out at
the extremely low rate of criminal prosecutions: 2016 – 0%, 2017 – 2%,
2018 – 40%, 2019 –3,1%, 2020 – 11,6% (Report, 2020).
Diculties of investigating criminal oenses are in some ways caused by
complicated technologies of voter bribery, which include several stages, take
into account modern possibilities of opposing investigations, particularly
in the form of the prosecution of such crimes, as well as the psychology
of interactions between the giver of bribe and the person who is actually
bribed.
1. Theoretical Framework
The article employs a set of research methods, namely: terminological,
system-structural, formal-legal and statistical (grouping, deduction,
analysis of quantitative indicators). The empirical basis of the article
is constituted by the generalized materials of investigative and judicial
practice; systematized statistical information about the dynamics of
criminal oenses related to electoral bribery, as well as the results of work
of law enforcement agencies; analytical materials and informational reports
of the Ministry of Internal Aairs, National Police, Oce of the Prosecutor
General, Committee of Voters of Ukraine, the “Opora” civic network.
Theoretical foundation of the article is based on scientic works, provisions
of the Criminal (2001), the Criminal Procedure (2012) and the Electoral
(2019) Codes of Ukraine and the provisions of the Laws of Ukraine “On
the Elections of People’s Deputies of Ukraine” (2011), “On Local Elections”
(2015), “On Elections of the President of Ukraine” (1999) and others.
The system-structural method has been used to describe stages of
implementation of the electors by creating an «electoral network» and the
peculiarities of creating an “electoral batch” of the “electoral pyramid”.
Statistical methods have been used to summarize results of sociological
research, study of criminal proceedings materials, law enforcement and
judicial practice.
The formal-legal method has allowed authors to analyze the legal essence
of the provisions of regulatory legal acts, which regulate organization of
the electoral process in Ukraine and establish liability grounds for election
violations.
Of course, comparative legal method has been actively employed in this
article as well. It helped to get a better image of illegal electoral behavior
both in Ukraine and some other jurisdictions. We have previously pointed
out the importance of using comparative method in legal research (Movchan
et al., 2022).
150
Adrii Vozniuk, Mariia Hryha, Iryna Botnarenko, Tamara Makarenko y Oksana Bryskovska
Electoral corruption: illegal voter bribery technologies
2. Analysis of recent research
Works of such scientists as Hryhorova (2021), Kubareva (2020), and
others are devoted to the study of certain aspects of the investigated issues.
Besides, researchers of the National Academy of Internal Aairs (O. Taran,
O. Kubareva, A. Vozniuk, M. Hryha, Ya. Diakin and others) over the course
of four years have been researching problematic aspects of the investigation
of bribery of a voter, voter-participant of the referendum, as a result of
which the relevant methodological recommendations have been prepared
(Taran et al., 2020).
Without diminishing the role of scientic contribution of the
abovementioned scientists, it is necessary to acknowledge that a lot of
problematic issues related to the investigation and prevention of crimes
provided for by Art. 160 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, continue to
occur. Now, after the introduction of amendments to this norm, as well as
taking into account the emergence of new methods of implementation of
election bribery, studying specics of the implementation of illegal election
technologies is of essential importance for the implementation of a quick,
complete and eective investigation of these crimes and preventing them.
The purpose of this article is to investigate the most common modern
technologies of voter bribery in order to improve methods of investigating
criminal oenses associated with manifestations of electoral corruption.
3. Results and Discussion
Various classications of bribery in the electoral process have been
formed in academic science, but the most widely spread one is based on
the familiarity with the subject of corrupt relations. According to such
classication the following types can be named: bribery of electors; bribery
of candidates and authorized representatives or trusted individuals; bribery
of members of election commissions; bribery of witnesses; bribery of mass
media representatives.
Bribery of the electorate consists of giving the elector a wrongful win for
any actions related to the indirect exercise by the voter of his/her election
right (Kushnaryov, 2018). Bribery of an elector is dened by the Black’s
Law Dictionary as a crime committed by the one who gives or promises to
give, or oers money or anything of value to bribe an elector for the purpose
of corruption, to encourage others to vote in a certain way or to refrain from
voting or to pay the voter for voting in any way by refraining from voting.
Bribery of voters was criminalized through changes to the Criminal
Code of Ukraine, introduced in 2014. Despite this, the Committee of Voters
151
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 75 (2022): 145-163
of Ukraine has recorded multiple facts, when a vote was purchased for as
low as UAH 50 (in the “poorest” districts) up to more than UAH 1,000, or
cash certicates, grocery sets, the opportunity to use certain services (for
example, free public transport, medicines, etc.), concluding with voters of
extralegal “social agreements”. Bribery of voters can be not only personal,
but also corporate in nature (for example, provision of goods, services,
equipment for social institutions, organizations).
Voter bribery is a serious problem in ensuring a fair ground during
election process. This issue has caused concern among relevant stakeholder
parties in many countries, including Bulgaria, Lithuania, Montenegro,
Romania, San Marino, Serbia, and Slovakia (2011). Credible reports on
bribery of voters on election day have been registered in Armenia, Bulgaria,
Kyrgyzstan, Latvia (2010), Lithuania, Moldova (2011), Romania (2012),
Serbia, Slovakia and Ukraine (2012) (Binder et al., 2013), USA (Levitt,
2007).
As for Ukraine, the report by international observer’s states that during
local elections in 2015, reports were recorded with accusations of bribery
of voters, and there were also cases when candidates handed out grocery
kits to low-income voters directly or through charities organizations
(International Election Observation Mission, 2005).
Analysis of the situation regarding the realization by the electors of their
right during the electoral processes of national and local elections in Ukraine
has revealed that the freedom of making a decision by voters is constantly
subjected to an unlawful inuence. The main problem is the bribery of the
voters, which is often the main factor, which inuences election results.
At the legislative level, two ways of bribing voters have been dened:
direct and indirect. Thus, Decree of the Central Election Commission No.
376 of February 22, 2019 “On the Role of implementation of the provisions
of part six of Article 64 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Election of the
President of Ukraine” (currently, this Decree became null and void on June
25, 2020) by direct bribery of electors is dened as a proposal, promise or
giving to a voter or a participant of referendum participant for committing
or not committing any actions related to the indirect exercise by the voter
of his/her election right or right to participate in the referendum (refusal
to participate in voting, voting at the electoral booth (referendum) more
than once, voting for an individual candidate in the elections, candidates of
a political party, local organization of a political party, or withdrawal from
such voting, transfer of the election ballot to another person).
Indirect bribery is dened in the mentioned Resolution as the
performance of the electoral campaign by means of providing illegal
benet or free of charge goods (except for the goods which contain visual
representations of the name, symbols, ags of a political party, the cost
152
Adrii Vozniuk, Mariia Hryha, Iryna Botnarenko, Tamara Makarenko y Oksana Bryskovska
Electoral corruption: illegal voter bribery technologies
of which does not exceed the size established by law), works, services,
enterprises, institutions, organizations (Resolution of the Central Election
Commission, 2019).
Currently, according to part 14, Art. 74 of the Law of Ukraine “On the
Election of People’s Deputies of Ukraine” the entities that may be granted
an unlawful benet in the specied manner include voters, in addition to
enterprises, institutions and organizations: “granting voters, institutions:
giving electioneers, institutions, organizations free or on a voluntary basis,
of goods, services, works, valuable partners, credits, lottery tickets, other
material valuables, which is accompanied by requests or oers to vote for
or not to vote for a certain party or candidate or by mentioning the name of
the party or the name of the candidate is indirect bribery of the voters”(Law
of Ukraine, 2011).
We suggest reviewing the most common ways of implementing direct
and indirect bribery of election ocials.
The experience of election districts in recent years, as well as the analysis
of judicial and investigative practice, testies to the mass character of direct
vote buying with a purpose of beneting a certain candidate for the election.
Here the general mechanism often includes two stages.
On the rst stage, there is a search for potential voters, who can be given
monetary reward or other “material reward” for committing any actions
connected with their indirect exercise of their voting rights. Such actions
may include, in particular: falsied will of a voter at the time of voting or
refusal to participate therein; voting at the polling station more than once;
handing over one’s ballot paper to another person; election commission
member’s refusal to participate in its work; withdrawing one’s candidacy
for the relevant elected position, etc.
It is noteworthy that in some cases those who intend to “buy” votes
are looking for an active member of society who is aware of the residents
of a certain locality and has credibility in a certain social environment.
Such person is promoted among the socially disadvantaged groups of the
population, who, due to their precarious material status, are willing to
accept the suggestion to improve their income status – among the student
environment, elderly people (pensioners), persons on parental leave,
residents of rural areas, etc. Such intermediary person will directly oer,
promise and reward voters for voting in favor of the desired candidate (of a
political party) (Kubareva, 2020).
In other cases such search is made indirectly, when a promise of
material incentives for the relevant actions of the voter are provided by:
a) virtual pre-election trade on the Internet through social networks Viber,
WhatsApp, Instagram, etc.; b) the use of anonymous phone calls with
an oer receiving an illegal benet in exchange for voting for one of the
153
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 75 (2022): 145-163
candidates for the elected oce; c) distribution of leaets with the promise
of an undue benet (for example, to write o debts for communal services
in case of voting for one of candidates, etc.) (Taran et al., 2020).
In order to bribe voters, as well as to “sell” citizens’ votes oenders
actively use Internet, where dozens of messages appear with approximately
the following content: “How to sell your vote in the upcoming elections?”,
“For how much you can sell your vote in the elections?”, “Is it possible to
ocially sell your vote on elections?” etc. At the same time, in some foreign
countries (Germany, Denmark, Canada) selling one’s vote constitutes a
criminal oense.
Sometimes violators conclude “agreements” with the voter, whose vote
they intend to buy with indicating passport data and signatures of voters or,
even, are selected receipts on the obligation to vote for a particular candidate
in the elections (candidates from a political party, local organization of
a political party). Simultaneously with signing such “document” voter
receives a so-called “social card” with a certain amount on his account,
which can be obtained after a certain period of time after election results
have been posted.
It can also be a plastic card for receiving discounts on purchases of
goods in a certain store – again after the elections. As a rule, specied cards
are provided to the voter not directly from the respective candidate, but
instead created by “charitable foundations” specically for this purpose.
For example, during 2015 local elections the “social card” of Charitable
Foundation “Nash Krai” was used for the purpose of bribery in Luhansk
region (Antipov and Topchiy, 2017).
Foreign authors also critically refer to the conclusion of agreements with
voters in order to buy their votes (Levitt, 2007).
At the next stage, illegal benet for the “correct” vote is directly
transferred. Having switched to one of the above-mentioned ways to change
their will at the elections, perpetrators, as a general rule, transfer the money
step by step:
1. on the eve of voting (1-2 days before or on the day of the election)
they give a part of material reward;
2. after the will is fullled and the proof of the vote for the required
candidate’s favor, they give the rest of the money. At the same time,
verication of “correctness” of the election is carried out dierently.
Sometimes it is necessary to put against the name of a particular
candidate a specic mark, which is distinguished from all the others.
In practice, there are cases when voters are obliged to throw their
ballots to specially designated ballot box, which is monitored by
an individual person, who puts specic marks on the list of bribed
154
Adrii Vozniuk, Mariia Hryha, Iryna Botnarenko, Tamara Makarenko y Oksana Bryskovska
Electoral corruption: illegal voter bribery technologies
persons compiled in advance (Verdict of the Ostroh District Court
of Rivne Region, 2016).
However, in 74.6% of the criminal cases that we have reviewed, in order
to conrm the fact of voting with a purpose of obtaining an illegal benet,
the mechanism of photographing the ballot paper after direct voting in the
booth at the polling station has been used. As a rule, for the purpose of
identication, the voter had to take, along with the ballot, a photo of his/her
passport or any other document identifying a person. After that, the photo
must be sent via a mobile social media app (Viber, WhatsApp, Telegram,
Messenger, etc.).
Such actions directly violate the secrecy of the vote. Thus, according to
Article 7 of the Law of Ukraine “On Local Elections”, photographing, video
xating by any means the results of the voters’ will in the voting booth, as
well as demonstration of the results of voluntariness in the voting room by
the voter are explicitly prohibited (Law of Ukraine, 2015).
However, the mere fact of photographing does not entail the person may
be held liable for violation of the voting condentiality [Article 159 of the
Criminal Code of Ukraine] a person can be prosecuted only in case of proof
of intentional disclosure of the content of the declaration of will (Research,
2019).
Academic literature describes various technologies of bribery of electors.
B. Vishnevskiy identies several basic ways of corrupting the election
ocials. The rst one is “conditioning” –virtuous activity of a prospective
candidate before the start of the election. The other is the “agreement”,
when candidates formally conclude factual agreements providing for the
work (services) to be performed by the election candidates, while the
payments are made in reality. The third technology – “carousel”, also called
“clean ticket”, “turntable” or “helicopter”, is quite widespread.
The mechanism of this method is the following: the voter is asked to
take a clean ballot out of the polling station for a fee. This ballot is lled in
by the “purchasers” and is oered to another voter for casting his/her vote.
After that, the latter presents his blank ballot to the “buyer” and receives a
reward. The fourth technology, called a “bus”, consists of a mass drive of the
voters to the polling stations and handing out the following rewards. And
the last one, the “dumping”, is the provision of free services on behalf of the
name of the candidate or an organization that supports it, the sale of goods
at reduced prices or for free (Vishnevsky, 2018).
Implementation of voter bribery through an extensive network usually
includes the following steps:
1. Compilation of voter lists with their personal data, as well as
information about their political favorites. Such activities are carried
155
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 75 (2022): 145-163
out in dierent ways: survey (questionnaire) under the guise of
sociological research, collection signatures for relevant social projects,
etc.; involvement of knowledgeable electoral subject’s process
(members of election commissions, observers) or representatives of
local authorities (at such as heads of village councils).
It should be noted that such uncontrolled collection of passport data
creates practical possibilities for illegal inuence on the will of the electorate
by means of bribery (Hryhorova, 2019).
2. Recruitment of agents for the purpose of selecting trustworthy
persons to form a “bribery network”. Agitators, as a rule, are people
“from the local community”, which are characterized by three
features: a great freedom to disarrange their own time; a search for
various kinds of making additional income; communicability (Dirty
election technologies, 2019). So called “recruitment” of agents is
carried out, mainly among employees of the budgetary sphere, by
announcing it 3-4 months prior to elections.
Representatives of the candidate hold meetings of the employees of the
budgetary sphere, as a rule, in public places, where they carry out advocacy
and public debate. Such meetings are occasionally accompanied by the
distribution of informational materials in the form of newspapers, leaets,
calendars, stationery, and displays of photographs, demonstration of lms
about the achievements of the candidate in question.
3. Providing authorized persons with the lists of voters who have already
indicated to vote for the desired candidate. The list is determined
by the election headquarters of an individual election candidate
(candidates of a political party, local organization political party).
4. Visiting places of residence (houses, apartments) where potential
voters are invited to vote in the election for an individual candidate
(candidates of a political party), the election law does not contain
any provisions on the right to vote for a candidate (or candidates of a
political party). It is explained to them that they will receive material
compensation for their services. In addition, on the day of election
they oer to take a photo of their ballot with a “checkmark” next to a
particular name. All this is accompanied by distribution of campaign
products of the appropriate political force and by inclusion of data to
the lists.
5. Payment of money to trusted persons who carried out agitation for
the benet of an individual candidate for a particular candidate in
the elections (candidates of a political party, local political party
organizations), who, in turn, one week before the elections begin
to deliver money to each household (according to the lists). At the
same time there are cases of transferring money by the agents to
156
Adrii Vozniuk, Mariia Hryha, Iryna Botnarenko, Tamara Makarenko y Oksana Bryskovska
Electoral corruption: illegal voter bribery technologies
individuals who will vote from the place of residence (Kubareva,
2020).
Classic schemes of organizing voter bribery by forming “nets” can be
supplemented with various elements and stand out with certain features.
Indeed, during organization of election campaign in the past Presidential
elections one of the candidates has organized mass bribery scheme using
personal ID cards with QR code.
It should be added that activities of recruiters (agitators) are distinguished
by variability and versatility. Indeed, after receiving illegal funds from the
organizers intended for the voters, they try to make this procedure cheaper
(for example, by buying expired products, alcohol of dubious quality and
oering them wholesale to voters). Sometimes recruiters’ resort to various
types of falsication, by fabricating photo reports in particular (Devitskiy
and Zhmurov, 2017).
We would like to emphasize that campaigning itself is not a criminal
oense. At the same time, according to part 6 of Art. 57 of the Election Code
of Ukraine (Electoral Code of Ukraine, 2019) and part 6 of Art. 64 of Law of
Ukraine “On the Election of the President of Ukraine” (Law of Ukraine, 2019),
it is prohibited to conduct pre-election campaigning accompanied by giving
voters money or free of charge or on preferential terms for goods, services,
works, securities, loans, lotteries. Such pre-election campaigning or giving
money to voters, also providing goods, services, works, securities, loans,
lotteries, whether free of charge or on preferential terms, accompanied by
appeals or oers to vote or not to vote for a certain candidate or mentioning
his name, is considered bribery of voters, thus making it a criminal oense.
In this aspect, we note that voters with a low level of nancial well-
being become quite protable for majority candidates. Having renovated
kindergartens and schools or roads, they easily win the electorate. Thus,
the level of material wealth is closely related to the scale of voter bribery.
During the parliamentary election campaign of 2012, voter bribery has
become massive, in large due to the charitable funds. Pro-government
political forces used budget funds for territories where candidates from the
government were nominated (Polishchuk, 2018).
The next “grey” technology, which was widely used in previous election
campaigns in Ukraine and contained elements of voter bribery is the so-
called “carousel”. The essence of the technology is quite simple: one of the
bribed voters takes his blank ballot out of the polling station and gives it
to the senior scheme member. Next, a corresponding mark is placed on
this ballot for the “necessary” candidate. The ballot is given to the next
participant of the “merry-go-round” scheme (Polishchuk, 2015; Horodok
et al., 2016).
157
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 75 (2022): 145-163
Not only election tickets, but also certicates for the right to participate
in elections can be bought. Such certicate is issued to the electorate if he or
she for personal reasons cannot exercise their election right in that locality
(election oce) where he/she was included into the list of electors. Analysis
of criminal prosecutions indicates that such certicates are often purchased
from the voters for the purpose of their further use for voting by nominees.
There are also cases of bribery involving the use of corrupted personal
ID cards which, among other things, provide the possibility of voting for a
certain candidate repeatedly and/or at several electoral oces.
Without obtaining a transparent certicate, it is possible to change
one’s place of participation in elections by changing the registration of the
place of residence, which, as numerous examples demonstrate, has been
also actively used by election ocials during machinations to bribe voters
(Hryhorova, 2021).
It is worth mentioning that in some cases voters were not informed
in general about the fact that registration of their place of residence has
changed (Verdict, 2016), and in some cases even their personal presence
at the site of crime was unnecessary (Verdict, 2015). Here we would like to
draw attention to the extremely low level of legal culture and the imprudence
of voters who have completely irresponsibly handed over their passports to
outsiders without realizing all the possible consequences of such actions.
In some places, the act of bribing voters to vote at polling stations in
other constituencies through ctitious registration was massive in scale,
distinguished by extreme audacity and has signicantly inuenced results
of the elections.
Considering scientic and technological progress and social
development, criminal vote-buying technologies are currently not standing
still, but are being actively improved over time with the use of social
networks (Facebook, Instagram, etc.), means of mobile communication,
contracts for campaigning and other services, thus disguising de facto “vote
sales”.
It should be noted that in future parliamentary and presidential
elections, except traditional food rations and entertainment, experts expect
new one’s forms of bribery to surface. According to forecasts of the all-
Ukrainian public organization “Committee of Voters of Ukraine”, among
the “trends” of the next election campaign will be nancial assistance to
military servicemen and their families (donation of apartments, cars,
furniture, household appliances, medical assistance – funds for operations
and prosthetics), material assistance to immigrants from occupied
territories (Bribery, 2021).
158
Adrii Vozniuk, Mariia Hryha, Iryna Botnarenko, Tamara Makarenko y Oksana Bryskovska
Electoral corruption: illegal voter bribery technologies
Researchers also point at the direct relationship between falsication of
voting results and voter turnout during elections. Expression of the voter’s
will today have a suciently low index of participation in the elections,
which indicates legal nihilism of the population, its low electoral activity.
However, even in developed democratic countries there are legal norms
that impose liability for non-appearance of voters at elections, for example,
in Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Brazil, Greece, Egypt, Luxembourg, Turkey,
Pakistan and other countries (Punishment, 2018).
As a rule, the transfer of undue benets to voters is carried out in two
stages: before voting and after it, provided that the voter has been bribed in
a specic manner.
Conclusion
One of the forms of electoral corruption during the electoral process
is bribery of voters, which means forcing the will of the active subject
(candidate) over the passive one, satisfying his needs of a property or non-
property nature and determining behavior of the latter. This is one of the
most widespread and most harmless forms of corruption. Unconscious
consent of citizens for the purpose of the unknowing acquiescence of
citizens for the purpose of obtaining material benets, without considering
the consequences, is negatively reected both in the development of society
and the state as a whole.
The most widespread method of committing voters’ bribery and the one
causing a serious threat of spoiling real results of the voting is recognized
to be creation of “electoral nets”. Serving as a form of indirect bribery of
voters, this technology was implemented by using the scheme of marginal
marketing in the organization of election campaign by setting up a large-
scale buying of votes. Specic features of such malignant network are:
its mass character with involvement of a wide circle of participants with
various roles; signicant territorial expansion; implementation of the
malicious intent through clearly planned step-by-step activities within the
limits of a temporary criminal group.
The study of the peculiarities of the organization of “electoral nets” is
of great importance for the development of an eective methodological
approach to the investigation of malpractices related to electoral bribery.
The implementation of such proceedings in practice is accompanied by a
whole series of complications related, in addition to the latent nature of
these crimes, to the diculties of their documentation, including the need
to use special knowledge related to both organization of the election process
and the need to investigate digital traces, which often represent evidence
base.
159
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 75 (2022): 145-163
The main task of the administrative activity of our state at the current
stage of development can be dened as ensuring and maintaining public
trust in the election results (both on the part of the participants of the
election process and on the part of the international community), through
the mechanisms of their active involvement in the election process at all
stages of its implementation. Therefore, further scientic research on
the mentioned topic seems promising, taking into account the fact that
voter bribery technologies are constantly changing and improving and,
accordingly, investigation of illegal activities related to their implementation
has to be transformed, while meeting new challenges.
Bibliographic References
ANTIPOV, Vladyslav; TOPCHIY, Vasyl. 2017. Criminal-legal qualication of
encroachments on surage and referendum rights. Vinnytsia, Ukraine.
ASUNKA, Joseph; BRIERLEY, Sarah; GOLDEN, Miriam; KRAMON, Eric;
OFOSU, George. 2013. Election Observers and Electoral Fraud. Annual
Meetings of the American Political Science Association. Available online.
In: https://extranet.sioe.org/uploads/isnie2013/asunka_brierley_
golden_kramon_ofosu.pdf. Consultation date: 22/06/2022.
BINDER, Christina; MAZMANYAN, Armen; VULCHANOV, Nikolay. 2013.
Review of the electoral legislation and practice of participants – OSCE
states, p. 25. Available online. In: https://www.osce.org/les/f/
documents/c/6/107074.pdf. Consultation date: 17/05/2022.
BRIBERY, Unfortunately, Will Be in Trend Again. 2021. In: Voice of Ukraine.
Available online.
CARSON, Lindsey; MOTA PRADO, Mariana. 2016. “Using institutional
multiplicity to address corruption as a collective action problem: Lessons
from the Brazilian case” In: The Quarterly Review of Economics and
Finance. Vol. 62, pp. 56-65.
CRIMINAL CODE OF UKRAINE. 2001. № 2341 – III. Available online. In:
http://zakon5.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2341-14. Consultation date:
22/10/2022.
DECISION OF THE PECHERSK DISTRICT COURT OF KYIV. 2019. CASE
NO. 757/10061/19-K. AVAILABLE ONLINE. IN: HTTP://REYESTR.
COURT.GOV.UA/REVIEW/80363325. CONSULTATION DATE:
11/07/2022.
160
Adrii Vozniuk, Mariia Hryha, Iryna Botnarenko, Tamara Makarenko y Oksana Bryskovska
Electoral corruption: illegal voter bribery technologies
DEVITSKIY, EDUARD; ZHMUROV, DMITRIY. 2017. “VOTER BRIBERY:
THE VIEW OF A CRIMINOLOGIST” IN: ALL-RUSSIAN
CRIMINOLOGICAL JOURNAL. VOL. 11, NO. 2, PP. 289-298.
DIRTY ELECTION TECHNOLOGIES. 2019. AVAILABLE ONLINE. IN:
HTTPS://RACURS.UA/EN/2202-BRUDNI-PEREDVYBORCHI-
TEHNOLOGIYI-PIDKUP-VYBORCIV.HTML#. CONSULTATION
DATE: 11/07/2022.
ELECTORAL CODE OF UKRAINE. 2019. LAW OF DECEMBER 19. NO. 396-
IX. AVAILABLE ONLINE. IN: HTTPS://ZAKON.RADA.GOV.UA/
LAWS/SHOW/396-20/CONV. CONSULTATION DATE: 16/07/2022.
HORODOK, Mykhailo; KARTASHOV, Andrii; ROMANENKO, Yevhen;
STASIUK, Viktor. 2016. Election victory: technologies, campaigns,
principles: practical manual. Kyiv, Ukraine.
HRYHOROVA, Yevheniia. 2019. “Organization of “election networks” as a
way to bribe a voter, a referendum participant” In: Scientic Bulletin of
the International Humanities University. Jurisprudence series. Vol. 2,
No. 41, pp. 96-99.
HRYHOROVA, Yevheniia. 2021. Investigation of bribery of a voter, referendum
participant. The dissertation on competition of the scientic degree
Doctor of Philosophy on a specialty 081 – Law. “National Academy of
Internal Aairs”. Kyiv, Ukraine.
INTERNATIONAL Election Observation Mission (IOM) Ukraine – Local
elections. 2015. Available online. In: www.osce.org/uk/odihr/elections/
ukraine/194456?download=true. Consultation date: 22/06/2022.
IVANOV, Mykola; DAVYDENKO, Yulia. 2019. “Methods of election falsication
and possible countermeasures” In: Scientic works. Politology. Vol. 322,
No. 310.
KALYNOVSKYI, Bohdan; KHALOTA, Andrii; HORODNYTSKYI, Pavlo;
RADOMSKA, Daryna. 2022. “Use of electronic forms of direct
democracy: international experience and perspective Ukrainians” In:
Cuestiones Políticas. Vol. 40, No. 72, pp. 222-244.
KESHIKOVA, Natalia; DEMESHKO, Igor. 2021. “El concepto y la estructura de
las actividades en el campo de la organización y celebración de elecciones
a órganos gubernamentales en la teoría del derecho constitucional” In:
Cuestiones Políticas. Vol. 39, No. 71, pp. 682-702.
KOLSTAD, Ivar; WIIG, Arne. 2016. Does democracy reduce corruption?
Available online. In: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13
510347.2015.1071797. Consultation date: 17/05/2022.
161
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 75 (2022): 145-163
KUBAREVA, Olha. 2020. “Forensic analysis of ways to bribe voters” In:
Comparative and analytical law. No. 1, pp. 541-544.
KUSHNARYOV, Ihor. 2018. Political and corrupt actions: modern forms.
Іn: VII All-Ukrainian political readings of the name Professor Bohdan
Yarosh: collection of conference materials. Lutsk, Ukraine.
LAW OF UKRAINE. 1999. Law March 5, No. 474-XIV. On election of the
President of Ukraine. Available online. In: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/
laws/show/474-14. Consultation date: 12/07/2022.
LAW OF UKRAINE. 2011. Law of November 17, No. 4061-VI. On Elections of
People’s Deputies of Ukraine. Available online. In: https://zakon.rada.
gov.ua/laws/show/4061-17. Consultation date: 11/07/2022.
LAW OF UKRAINE. 2015. Law of July 14, No. 595-VIII. On local elections.
Available online. In: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/main/595-19.
Consultation date: 12/07/2022.
LAW OF UKRAINE. 2020. Law of July 16, No. 805-IX. On Amending Certain
Legislative Acts of Ukraine to improve the election legislation. Available
online. In: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/805-20?nd#Text.
Consultation date: 12/07/2022.
LEVITT, Justin. 2007. The truth about voter fraud. p. 22. Available online. In:
https://www.brennancenter.org/media/179/download. Consultation
date: 19/07/2022.
MOVCHAN, Roman; VOZNIUK, Andriy; KAMENSKY, Dmitriy; KOVAL, Iryna;
GOLOVKO, Olha. 2022. “Criminal and legal protection of land resources
in Ukraine and Latin America: comparative legal analysis” In: Amazonia
Investiga. Vol. 11, No. 51, pp. 328-336.
MYKHAILOV, Mykhailo. 2020. “Мethodological concept of the research of
criminal and legal support against corruption bribery in Ukraine” In:
Reality of Politics. Estimates – Comments – Forecasts. No. 14, pp. 123-
133.
ORLOV, Yuriy. 2016. Political and criminological theory of crime prevention:
monograph. Kharkiv, Ukraine.
ORR, Graeme David. 2005. Dealing in Votes: Electoral Bribery and its Regulation
in Australia. Available online. In: https://research-repository.grith.
edu.au/bitstream/handle/10072/365293/02Whole.pdf?sequence=1.
Consultation date: 27/06/2022.
162
Adrii Vozniuk, Mariia Hryha, Iryna Botnarenko, Tamara Makarenko y Oksana Bryskovska
Electoral corruption: illegal voter bribery technologies
PAVLOVSKYI, Andrii. A. 2019. The scheme of bribery of voters became
known! Available online. In: https://blog.liga.net/user/apavlovskiy/
article/32383. Consultation date: 11/07/2021.
POLISHCHUK, Ihor. 2015. Electoral technologies: essence and varieties. In:
Bulletin of the Yaroslav Mudryi National University of Ukraine. Vol. 27,
No. 4, pp. 106-112.
POLISHCHUK, Oleh. 2018. Selection of technologies in Ukraine: the specics of
the stagnation and the main trends in the development. The dissertation
on competition of a scientic degree of the candidate of political sciences
on a specialty 23.00.02 – political institutes and processes. “Kharkiv
National Pedagogical University named after H. SKOVORODA”.
Kharkiv, Ukraine.
Punishment FOR NON-PARTICIPATION IN ELECTIONS IN FOREIGN
COUNTRIES. 2018. Available online. In: http:// ria.ru/
spravka/20140626/1013682909.htlm. Consultation date: 23/06/2022.
Report OF THE GENERAL PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE OF UKRAINE ON
REGISTERED CRIMINAL OFFENSES AND THE RESULTS OF THEIR
PRE-TRIAL INVESTIGATION FOR 2016–2020. 2020. Available
online. In: https://old.gp.gov.ua/ua/statinfo.html. Consultation date:
17/05/2022.
RESEARCH. 2019. How voters are bought in Ukraine and who was responsible
for it. 17 court verdicts. Available online. In: https://glavcom.ua/
publications/yak-v-ukrajini-kupuyut-viborciv-i-hto-za-ce-vidpoviv-
17-sudovih-virokiv-doslidzhennya-388367.html. Consultation date:
13/07/2022.
Resolution OF THE CENTRAL ELECTION COMMISSION. 2019. Resolution
of February 22, No. 376. On clarication on the implementation of the
provisions of part six of Article 64 of the Law of Ukraine “On Elections of
the President of Ukraine”. Available online. In: https://zakon.rada.gov.
ua/laws/main/v0376359-19. Consultation date: 11/07/2022.
SOKURENKO, Valery. 2017. Electoral corruption as a factor of false
democratic political regime. Current problems of criminal law and
criminology in the light of criminal reform. Kharkiv, Ukraine, pp. 13-
14. Available online. In: http://dspace.univd.edu.ua/xmlui/bitstream/
handle/123456789/1875/ELEKTORALNA%20KORUPTsIIa_
Sokurenko_2017.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y. Consultation date:
22/06/2022.
163
CUESTIONES POLÍTICAS
Vol. 40 Nº 75 (2022): 145-163
STOCKEMER, Daniel; LAMONTAGNE, Bernadette; SCRUGGS, Lyle. 2013.
“Bribes and ballots: The impact of corruption on voter turnout in
democracies” In: International political science review. Vol. 34, No. 1,
рр.74-90.
TARAN, Olena; KUBAREVA, Olha; VOZNYUK, Andrii. 2020. Investigation of
bribery of a voter, a referendum participant: methodical guidance. Kiev,
Ukraine.
Verdict OF THE BILHOROD-DNISTROVSKY CITY DISTRICT COURT OF
ODESA REGION. 2016. Case No. 495/9629/15-к. Available online. In:
http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/55272702. Consultation date:
11/07/2022.
Verdict OF THE BILHOROD-DNISTROVSKY CITY DISTRICT COURT OF
ODESA REGION. 2015. Case No. 495/8730/15-к. Available online. In:
http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/54415237. Consultation date:
11/07/2022.
Verdict OF THE OSTROH DISTRICT COURT OF RIVNE REGION. 2016.
Case No. 567/123/16-k. Available online. In: http://reyestr.court.gov.
ua/Review/56229553. Consultation date: 11/07/2022.
VISHNEVSKY, B.L. 2018. Five technologies of bribing voters. Available online.
In: www.democracy.ru/library/practice/media/rfelec_gor/page46.
html. Consultation date: 17/05/2022.
VOZNIUK, Andrii; KAMENSKY, Dmytro; DUDOROV, Oleksandr;
MOVCHAN, Roman; ANDRUSHKO, Andrii. 2021. “Unconstitutionality
of criminal liability for ling inaccurate information in Ukraine: сritical
legal analyses” In: Cuestiones Políticas. Vol. 39, No. 69, pp. 133-145.
VRIES, Catherine; SOLAZ, Hector. 2017. “The Electoral Consequences of
Corruption” In: Annual Review of Political Science. Vol. 20, pp. 391-408.
www.luz.edu.ve
www.serbi.luz.edu.ve
www.produccioncienticaluz.org
Esta revista fue editada en formato digital y publicada
en diciembre de 2022, por el Fondo Editorial Serbiluz,
Universidad del Zulia. Maracaibo-Venezuela
Vol.40 Nº 75
