Ukraine 2004 Presidential Election (run-off annulled)
October 31, 2004 – December 26, 2004
The Supreme Court annulled the 21 November run-off on 3 December 2004, holding that the Central Election Commission had acted unlawfully and that the violations made it impossible to establish the genuine will of the voters. A repeat run-off was held on 26 December under amended rules and a newly appointed commission, and was won by Viktor Yushchenko. This is the case in the database where a court set aside a national result on the conduct of the count itself, rather than on the conduct of the campaign.
Resultados oficiales
First round, 31 October 2004
- Viktor Yushchenko39,9%11.188.675
- Viktor Yanukovych39,3%11.008.731
- Oleksandr Moroz5,8%1.632.098
- Petro Symonenko5%1.396.135
Annulled run-off, 21 November 2004
- Viktor Yanukovych49,5%15.093.691
Declared elected by the CEC on 24 November; the declaration was annulled by the Supreme Court on 3 December
- Viktor Yushchenko46,6%14.222.289
Valid repeat run-off, 26 December 2004
- Viktor Yushchenko52%15.115.712
- Viktor Yanukovych44,2%12.848.528
El Registro de Integridad
Lo que la evidencia establece y lo que no establece, lado a lado, con cada hallazgo documentado y clasificado.
Lo que está establecido
- Violaciones del procesoConfirmado
The Supreme Court ruled on 3 December 2004 that the Central Election Commission had acted unlawfully in determining the run-off result, annulled the resolutions declaring a winner, and ordered a repeat vote.
Más detalles
The Court found that the CEC had failed to examine territorial commission protocols and verify their accuracy, and had announced the results without considering complaints that were still pending. It annulled CEC resolutions No. 1264 and No. 1265 and ordered the Commission to schedule a repeat vote, which the CEC did the following day. The Court declined to declare the first-round leader elected.
- Falsificación de resultadosConfirmado
Turnout figures for Donetsk region were increased, on occasions after the close of polls — a fact that emerged during the Supreme Court's consideration of the appeal against the run-off result.
Más detalles
Observers recorded that the CEC announced turnout exceeding 96 per cent for the entire Donetsk region, which ODIHR described as implausible. This is the point at which the record moves from procedural failure to the alteration of reported figures.
- Violaciones del procesoConfirmado
Observers documented ballot box stuffing, forged absentee voting certificates and multiple voting, voters bussed between polling stations, large numbers of police and other unauthorised persons in polling stations, and failures to ensure the secrecy of the vote.
Más detalles
ODIHR reported these irregularities across the first two rounds and more often on 21 November. Absentee voting certificates, which allow a voter to cast a ballot away from their registered station, were the mechanism ODIHR singled out: the CEC did not ensure transparency in their use or establish controls against misuse, and before the first round did not even announce how many had been printed.
Fuentes:1 - Anomalías estadísticasConfirmado
Implausibly high turnout figures were recorded in both the annulled round and, to a lesser degree, in the repeat round that replaced it.
Más detalles
Because the newly appointed CEC published precinct-level results after the 26 December repeat vote, ODIHR was able to analyse them: of 33,075 precinct protocols posted, 736 showed turnout above 99 per cent, and 180 of those were precincts with more than 500 voters. The transparency measure that made the repeat round credible is also what made this anomaly visible.
Fuentes:1 - Violaciones del procesoConfirmado
During the first two rounds the state media showed an overwhelming bias toward the incumbent prime minister, guided by so-called temnyky — reported official instructions on how to cover certain issues, which ODIHR said could amount to a form of censorship.
Más detalles
ODIHR also recorded substantiated reports that the Yanukovych campaign abused state resources and that state employees and students were coerced or intimidated into supporting his candidacy. Before the 26 December repeat vote, coverage became markedly more balanced and journalists reported that temnyky were no longer in use.
Fuentes:1 - Violaciones del procesoConfirmado
The leading opposition candidate was poisoned with TCDD dioxin during the campaign, announced by his Vienna clinic in December 2004 and confirmed years later by peer-reviewed identification and measurement of the poison's metabolites.
Lo que no está establecido
- Falsificación de resultadosContestado
What the true 21 November result would have been — not established, and not establishable. The Supreme Court did not recompute a corrected tally; it held that the violations made it impossible to reliably establish the genuine will of the voters, which is why it ordered the vote to be held again rather than declaring a different winner.
- Injerencia extranjeraContestado
Who administered the poison — not established. The peer-reviewed study identifies the agent and confirms the poisoning but makes no finding about responsibility; the treating clinic said expressly that attributing blame was not its role; and no court has attributed it to any person or state.
- Falsificación de resultadosContestado
That the 26 December repeat vote was itself falsified — not established. The defeated candidate filed almost 100 complaints; the CEC considered the challenge to the result and found the evidence unconvincing, and the Supreme Court rejected the appeals, mostly on procedural grounds.
Fuentes:1 - Injerencia extranjeraContestado
That a foreign state directed the falsification — not established. No observer finding or court ruling in this record attributes the manipulation of the count to any state other than actors within Ukraine's own administration.
Evaluación del proceso
ODIHR concluded that the 31 October and 21 November rounds failed to meet a considerable number of OSCE commitments and other international standards, while the 26 December repeat round brought Ukraine substantially closer to meeting them — an improvement it attributed to clear political will, visible in the media coverage, the conduct of the campaign and the transparency of the new commission, including immediate publication of polling-station results.