No one is guilty, but in court, the theft of votes in Doboj would take place on the same model at almost all polling stations – by corresponding votes who did not exit the polls that were not deleted from the voter list.
Almost five years after the annulment of local elections in Doboj 2020. they continue to last the trials for the largest case of the election scam that dealt with domestic judiciary. 67 indictments were filed against 350 persons, and the Basic Court in Doboj, according to the latest information, brought 27 acquittals for 139 persons and only one conditional conviction against two persons. Most verdicts were made according to the same form: election scams have been proven, but there is no evidence that polling station committee members are for that.
In 22 Trial Judgments analyzed Transparency International in BiH It is confirmed that the Prosecution in all cases has succeeded in material evidence and witness testimonies to prove that the constituency of citizens most often repeated two scenarios:
- By voting on behalf of voters who did not go to the polls – most often those living abroad,
- By voting on behalf of dead persons who have not been deleted from the voter list.
The trial has been ordered by the annulment of the elections by the CEC, followed by criminal charges, investigations and indictments. Suspicion occurred for a record turnout of almost 70%, and at certain polling stations According to the CEC calculus It was found to be Every 50 seconds voted one voter.
After re-counting the votes, the CEC entered the proceedings in which graphological expertise of voter signatures and their comparison with the IDEEA data were performed, and on that occasion was determined that Kljotovreno 10-20% of voters signatures.According to this find, it is about counterfeiting similar or same signatures by one person for multiple rubrics on different names or adding initials in multiple rubrics.
What was proven in court?
The Prosecution, in most cases analyzed BiH, proved to theft of one to seven votes at the polling station, in a way that it was carried out by witnesses that they or their close relatives did not go to the polls and that their signatures were counterfeit. Proving made it difficult for a number of women whose voices did not come to BiH for years, police could not find them at the address, and the testimony of neighbor could not be accepted as proof that they did not vote. Likewise, the data of the border police that these persons did not enter BiH in that period could not be evidence in court, because there is no obligation to record every crossing the border.
Therefore, the relevant evidence was mostly the testimonies of voters who clearly confirmed that they did not go to the polls. Also, evidence in cases where they were voting on deaths and where it could be clearly confirmed that death was reported before the election. The Prosecution, therefore, in all judgments managed to prove this phenomenon, and in one of them states:
From the presented evidence of the Prosecution, the testimony of the Prosecution witness VA, GS and DG which are expressed in testifying that they did not go out the critical occasion on the polls, and insight into the statement from the mother book for the people of VJ and DM, the Prosecution was made by evidence proved that the mentioned 5 faces of the critical occasion did not go to voting and did not sign in the listed rubrics, already made someone elsehe is stated in the verdict.
Almost the same conclusion is repeated in most verdicts. In some cases, the Court rejected the proposal for graphological expertise to determine whether the members of the polling stations placed disputed signatures. In some cases, they did not agree to give handwriting, and it was considered that there was no proven work for which you are charged.
Who’s guilty?
Due to all the competent court, the Prosecution did not prove that polling stations were guilty, because anyone was signed in the elections, and everything was justified by the fact that the elections had been difficult for the voters.
In most verdicts, the Court states that the fact that the election results was falsifying, cannot automatically mean criminal responsibility for the election administration.
The Prosecution has not proved a member of the polling station committee, which allowed this person to be signed, nor to the circumstance of the Prosecution, and all this when voters must carry protective masks covering most of the face, holding distance, due to the distance Pointed Rules of Codestands in one of the judgments.
The Court considered it quite possible yes “Someone else’s face of approximate features that did not vote and votes in the name of the same, without members of the polling stations even know, let alone say that they allowed that all together and at the same time. Also, according to the Court of Court, Unlawful remains the fact that the electoral score was changed, as it is “Impossible to determine which candidate did the mentioned votes have.
What did the observers do?
The Court further argues the judgments of the statements of individuals who were observers on elections, as well as the fact that in many places, no one of the observers from various parties had comments on the election process. The fact that a large number of observers were not allowed to enter the polling stations was not the subject of proof, and the additional argument is and that the members of the polling stations are proposed from “opposing political options”.
Thus, in one of the judgments as an argument in favor of the accused, he states that “Five members of the polling station committee who have found in front of completely different political entities, ie PB in front of the SDA-SBiH-HB, BB in front of the SPS, KM in front of Gojković Nenad-independent candidate, KB in front of Sekulić Slavko-independent candidate, ie in front of politically opposing options “.
However, in these conclusions, the absurdity is completely ignored that most observers and members of the polling stations did representatives of options that did not receive any vote. Namely, to the polls reported 85 subjects, and 66 of them had fewer than 10 votes And their intention was obviously taking place in polling stations. That is why it is not clear from which the conclusion was carried out that they are mentioned options “opposing” and were not part of the same pre-agreed game Because they are e.g. Sekulić Slavko and Gojković, Nenad, in the entire Doboj, had one vote in the repeated elections.
At one polling station, where it was proven that they voted died faces, the SNSD observer “did not notice anything unusual.” On the other, where the persons who were abroad were proven, “Movement Bridge 21”, allegations, states that he did not seek irregularities, while the SNSD observer in favor of the Defense is that he denies that he is in “The flow of votes by one of the members of the polling station board inserted later ballots or corresponding names”.
PROPERTIES OF THE POSITION LIST
It is this fact that the entire election fraud played before the eyes of observers and members of the polling stations, which nominally belonged to different political options, opens a number of other issues and further undermines the integrity of the election process. The testimonies are evident that there was more possibilities – that the disputed votes were corresponded after the counting, that a large number of persons went through the process of identifying identity and voted in another’s name.
CEC data on 10-20% of signature that could be determined with certainty that they are forged illustrates the extent of the election scam, and who were the principals and organizers in these actions were not the subject of proof. Still, verdicts confirm that Non heriteness of the voter list The main source of electoral irregularities, because in addition to non-postcourting data from the mother books, the fact that tens of thousands of people leave BiH each year, and at the same time remain reported for voting at a regular voter site, open additional space for abuse.
SAME JUDGMENTS Open other issues such as those whether the persons in charge of organizing electoral frauds have the institutions before the Center for the Voter List. These examples show the necessity of introducing election technologies, primarily in electronic voters through fingerprint, as well as the vote-counting scanner to return the trust of citizens in the election process.
In addition, it is crucial for the judiciary to prosecute the examination of the exam and require the responsibility of the planning and organization of these acts, because the members of polling stations were generally limited, while the party officials are never prosecuted.
(Type / Source: Transparent.ba/Foto: Illustration)
