Цомартова Ф.А_summery (Роль средств массовой информации в избирательном процессе совершенствование информационно-правового регулирования), страница 3

However wesuggest that a provision should be added to Chapter 5.5 of the Code ofAdministrative Offences of the Russian Federation that imposes administrative12  penalty for a repeated violation of the order of electoral process by an editorialboard (increasing the fine by ten times).The author of the submitted thesis has published the following articlescontaining preliminary research findings, which can be seen as approbation ofresults derived from the study: The Problems of Legal Regulation of Media Accessfor Candidates and Electoral Associations During Election Campaigns: LegalAspect of Information Management//All-Russian Scientific Research Journal“Issues in Jurisprudence”. Issue 36. 2016.

No.2. Pp. 35-51; In Reference to theSuspension of a Mass Media Publication//Studies on Intellectual Property. Issue31. 2017. No. 4. Pp. 43-60; The Problems of Legal Distinction Between theConcepts of Informing Electorate and Election Campaigning// Studies onIntellectual Property. Issue 32. 2018. No. 1. Pp. 5-16; Equal Media Access ofCandidates and Electoral Associations as a Fundamental Condition for HoldingFree Elections//Collection of Academic Publications “Integration of the GlobalScientific Processes as the Basis for Social Progress”.The research has been completed in the Scientific and methodological unit“The UNESCO Department on authors` rights and intellectual property” under thesupervision the Higher School of Economics.The structure of the thesis is predetermined by its subject, purpose andtasks.

The thesis consists of an introduction (the general characteristic of thework), three chapters with 9 paragraphs, conclusion and references.BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE RESEARCHThe Introduction discloses such aspects of the research as its relevancetheoretical and empirical base, the overall purpose of the research and particularresearch tasks, the object and the scope of the research, introduces the novelty of13  the thesis, its practical and theoretical significance, methodology, states the mainpropositions and conclusions to be defended, gives evidence of approbation of thethesis results and presents the thesis structure.Chapter 1. “Mass Media as Part of the Electoral System of the RussianFederation” of the thesis consists of two paragraphs that aim to define theposition of entities managing mass media outlets in the system of actorsinvolved in electoral process.The first paragraph of the first chapter “The place of entities managingmass media outlets in the system of actors involved in electoral process:Russian researchers on the theoretical aspect of the problem” examines theterm “actor involved in electoral process (electoral law)”, considers the viewsof various authors on the issue of defining the position of entities managingmass media outlets in the system of actors involved in electoral process.The way this issue is handled determines the limitations and possibilitiesopen to the editorial boards when covering elections, which explains itsignificance.We have listed several classifications of actors involved in electoral process(including classifications proposed by R.T.

Biktagirov, V.A. Ershov, D.M.Khudoley, D.M. Miradzhanyan, K.V. Krasnov and others).Analysis of these classifications has let us make a conclusion that virtuallyall of the above authors recognize mass media as an actor involved in electoralprocess. It is only its place in the system that varies depending on theclassification.

Some authors view mass media as one of the primary, crucialelements of electoral process, others classify it as a secondary element of electoralprocess.The author of this thesis views mass media as a key instrument for informingelectorate about political rivals. The influence of mass media on the behavior ofelectorate is most clearly demonstrated during election campaigns.14  The conclusion made in the first paragraph is that entities managing massmedia outlets should be distinguished as independent actors of electoral process.The author also thinks it is correct to classify the media as a primary actor of theelectoral process, since it is the link that connects electorate and candidates.Moreover the media is one of the key tools used to inform voters about policies ofcompeting political forces.In today’s Russia public communication technologies have become the keyresource for managing social and political processes in the country and thusforming electoral relations regulated by information law legislation.The second paragraph of the first chapter “Classification of entitiesmanaging mass media outlets” provides categorization of the types of media inorder evaluate the role of mass media in the electoral process as accurately aspossible.The study presents classifications based on the type of owner and the legalstatus of entity upon registration, standard government classifications andclassification developed by the author by one’s own methodology.It was concluded that entities managing media outlets inform voters in thecontext of electoral process and also provide services to the registered candidatesand political parties required for election campaigning.

The providedclassifications are not exhaustive but allow to make a distinction between differenttypes of media, to create categories, to find common patterns and also to identifygrey zones about their legal situation .The media used for informing voters in electoral process are eitherregistered entities that can offer their services to registered candidates and electoralassociations or other communication agencies not forbidden by law.Internet media resources can also be seen as one of the main pillars of socialand political development of modern society.

Taking into account the stablegrowth of amount of regular internet users in Russia and expansion onlineadvertising market, we can safely say that independent online media will be15  increasing its influence on Russian elections.Chapter 2 “Involvement of entities managing mass media outlets inelectoral process” contains of three paragraphs.The first paragraph of the second chapter “Distinction between theconcepts of informing electorate and election campaigning” we show thedifference between the two processes, pay attention to the absence of formal legaldefinition for the term “informing voters” in the Russian legislation, analyze therelated court cases.We have paid particular attention in our research to the Judgment ofthe Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of 30/10/2018 No.

15-P in thecase concerning the constitutionality review of certain provisions of the FederalLaw “On Fundamental Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right of Citizens ofthe Russian Federation to Participate in a Referendum” in connection with arequest of a group of deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation andcomplaints of S.

A. Buntman, K. A. Katanyan, and K. S. Rozhkov.1.As a result we have singled out the criteria to distinguish between electioncampaigning and informing electorate.On the basis of our analysis of the respective court cases we can draw aconclusion that the judgments of the Supreme Court concerning classification ofmedia publications as materials used for informational support or for electioncampaigning are in line with the ruling of the Constitutional Court disclosed in theJudgment of 30/10/2018 No.

15-P. According to this ruling the main distinctionbetween the two types of publications is the presence of a specific aim toencourage voters to vote for or against a candidate.Without doubt this ruling of the Constitutional Court has changed the stateof affairs that existed before 2003 when virtually all of the informational supportby the media was treated as election campaigning and that led to administrative                                                            1Judgment in the case concerning the constitutionality review of certain provisions of the Federal Law “OnFundamental Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right of Citizens of the Russian Federation to Participate in aReferendum” in connection with a request of a group of deputies of the State Duma of the Russian Federation andcomplaints of S.

A. Buntman, K. A. Katanyan, and K. S. Rozhkov // Legislation of the Russian Federation. 2003.No. 44. P. 4358.16  penalties being imposed on representatives of publishing and broadcastingorganizations.However we believe that the problem solved by the ruling of theConstitutional Court was succeeded by a new problem. It turned out that it hasbecome next to impossible to classify media publications as election campaigning.The difficulty lies in proving there is a specific aim to encourage voters to vote foror against a candidate, which is the main distinction.Considering all of the above we have suggested that it is necessary to amendthe Federal Law “On Fundamental Guarantees…” by adding a legal definition ofthe term “informing voters”.It has been proposed to add to Chapter 2 of the Federal Law on fundamentalguarantees the following definition:“Informing (informing voters) - is the activity performed by authorizedinstitutes (including entities managing mass media outlets) during electioncampaigns which includes bringing to voters’ attention to the details of theupcoming elections, the procedure, the date, the place, the manner in which thevotes will be counted and the results will be made public, familiarizing voters withthe rights, duties and guarantees for the rights of the actors involved in electoralprocess and other information of the kind.We suggest that certain principles should be followed when informingvoters: objectivity, credibility, equality of rights of candidates and electoralassociations, freedom of press and broadcasting organizations.Furthermore in order to maintain public control over elections and to ensurecompliance of election campaigning with the rules we propose to create a PublicCouncil at the Central Electoral Commission of the Russian Federation.The second paragraph of the second chapter “Problems of legal regulationof media access for candidates and electoral associations” analyzes the normsregulating the order of providing equal opportunities to candidates when covering17  election campaigns in mass media (including state-owned publishers andbroadcasters).The paragraph pays particular attention to the decision of the EuropeanCourt of Human Rights in the case “The Communist Party of Russia and Others v.Russia” of 19/06/2012 and numerous legal disputes brought in Russian Courts.As a conclusion we recommend to exclude from the legislation the norms thatprevent giving free airtime and print space to candidates and parties that didn’treach the threshold at the previous elections (didn’t receive the minimum share ofvotes required by current legislation).

We propose to change these norms inaccordance with one of the approaches adopted by the Venice Commission of theCouncil of Europe: either strict equality or proportional equality.The author would like to comment favorably on the practice of holding TVdebates as part of election campaigns. But due to frequent refusals of candidates toparticipate, it has been proposed to introduce a legal norm that would bind them totake part in debates that including answering questions from the public receivedvia telephone calls and sms. It would also be reasonable to impose administrativepenalties on the candidates who opt-out of debates.The third paragraph of the second chapter “Responsibility of mass mediafor violations of the electoral legislation” discloses the types of penalties thatmay be imposed on mass media outlets for violating electoral law.We have analyzed Chapter 16.1 of “The Mass Media Act” and also anumber of legal norms under the Code of Administrative Offences imposingresponsibilities for non-compliance with the rules of informational support ofelections, for inappropriate timing of election campaigning and so on.This paragraph also pays a lot of attention to the practice of court disputesresolution.18  We have come to view Chapter 16.1 of “The Mass Media Act” as ineffectivein lieu of practically complete absence of precedents of suspension of activity of amass media outlet over violations in pre-election campaigning.