Russia’s 2026 parliamentary election has no meaningful competition. Independent observers still plan to document how paper and online results diverge.

In the summer of 2026, Yabloko — the only party representing Russia’s anti-establishment opposition and one that had campaigned against the war — was barred from the State Duma elections. Yabloko candidates running in single-member districts also faced obstacles, and the authorities managed to remove some from the race. There is no longer any meaningful political competition in the upcoming vote, especially because Moscow and dozens of other regions use remote electronic voting, which the authorities have used in previous years to rig the results. Even so, independent observers still plan to monitor the elections. The Kremlin has spent years making it harder for them to enter polling stations, but they can still do so. Meduza asked one observer why it is worth monitoring an election whose outcome has already been decided.

— Why did you decide to become an election observer?

— I’ve been monitoring elections in Moscow for more than 10 years. I’ve seen every change in election law unfold firsthand.

In the early 2010s, there was a huge surge in election monitoring and grassroots civic activity in general. Some people I knew invited me to join. Even then, like many people, I didn’t like what was happening in the country. I wanted to change something.

The person who invited me stopped doing this a long time ago, but I’m still at it.

— It seems that many longtime observers have burned out and that election monitoring is no longer as popular as it once was. Is that true?

— Some people really do burn out because you’re very rarely able to get a result overturned — to challenge fraud, that is — even at your own polling station.

Then, once the online votes are counted, the winners aren’t the candidates who came out ahead in the precinct election commission’s final tally but completely different ones. When people see all this, many decide that monitoring is pointless and leave.

On top of that, a great many people left the country in 2022 out of concern for their safety. Others simply got tired.

Further reading

Losing Golos Russia’s last independent election watchdog is shutting down. Here’s what that means for democracy in the country.

a year ago

— Why do you keep monitoring elections? There’s essentially no political competition in this election, and the authorities are using remote electronic voting…

— First, we never know what might suddenly make a difference or when. Suppose Yabloko had not been removed from the race for some reason. That would have been a huge incentive to try to protect Yabloko’s vote count. Not all polls can be trusted, but even those we saw suggested that Yabloko would have made a significant showing.

In any event, by being present at polling stations, we keep the machinery of fraud from expanding. The process is still cleaner with oversight than without it. If we aren’t there, absolute madness will unfold at polling stations. Our presence at least helps keep it in check.

In some local elections in regions without remote electronic voting, there is a very good chance that observers at polling stations will be able to protect votes cast for anti-war candidates.

Moscow, where I work as an observer, is a different matter. Remote electronic voting will be used in these State Duma elections and will most likely upend the results. But even in Moscow, some Yabloko candidates remain in the race [candidates in single-member districts]. And even if online voting reverses the results, we’ll be able to see a huge gap between the paper ballots counted at polling stations and the online vote. That will be revealing, too. It will show people that remote electronic voting clearly distorted the results and misrepresented how they voted.

— So you no longer see your role as forcing the authorities to overturn potentially fraudulent results, but rather as documenting the fraud?

— Sometimes we do manage to get the results overturned. There were cases like that in Moscow during the last parliamentary elections, in 2021. But ultimately, remote electronic voting decided everything there, too.

Further reading

Stop the steal, rock the vote Meduza explains the debate about the legitimacy of Moscow’s online elections

5 years ago

— How have you managed to avoid burning out over more than 10 years?

— That’s a very difficult question. Maybe it has something to do with my personality.

— The authorities do not welcome independent election monitoring. The clearest example is Grigory Melkonyants’s sentence. How do you assess the risks you face?

— To some extent, anyone in Russia faces risks right now. I don’t think mine are any greater than anyone else’s. I can recall only one case, in 2017, when a member of an election commission faced persecution for his work.

The system is still trying to preserve the appearance of legality, and I can’t recall any cases brought against observers specifically for their work.

Some neighborhood activists even deliberately seek appointments to election commissions in their districts. They do this not only to protect election results but also because the federal law “On Basic Guarantees of Electoral Rights and the Right of Citizens of the Russian Federation to Participate in a Referendum” still says that a court may impose administrative penalties on an election commission member only with the approval of the regional prosecutor. So to some extent, the position actually offers protection.

— How is independent monitoring at polling stations organized these days?

— Political parties and candidates appoint observers. We’re still able to reach agreements with parties represented in parliament, including A Just Russia and the Communist Party. I’ve heard that in some parts of Moscow, even the Liberal Democratic Party does this. It all depends on the local party organization.

We can also have candidates appoint observers [candidates running in single-member districts]. If a Yabloko candidate is running, the easiest thing is to have that candidate appoint the observers. If there is no Yabloko candidate, we have to negotiate with the parliamentary parties.

— Why are the parliamentary parties themselves interested in this?

— Some of them still retain a little independence at the grassroots level. Every State Duma deputy votes as instructed. But in some districts where parties have municipal deputies, they have to work with the public. Regional branches are still willing to make small compromises.

And some parties may still hope they can come to power someday. Parties also have an interest in preventing fraud because the more votes they receive, the more government funding they get. That’s where our interests overlap.

Sometimes observers are dropped when the list is handed over to the party, so only some of them ultimately make it into polling stations. But that’s still better than nothing.

Overall, the authorities have severely curtailed independent election monitoring. For some time now, only someone eligible to vote in the same election has been allowed to serve as an observer. In Moscow City Duma elections, for example, only a Moscow resident can serve, while in municipal elections, observers must even come from the same Moscow district. This has made it much harder to recruit observers for local elections.

— These days, polling stations may also have representatives from pro-government organizations that only purport to monitor elections — the autonomous nonprofit Dialog, for example. Have you encountered them?

— At polling stations, you’re most likely to encounter observers from the Civic Chamber. They try to cover almost every polling station, and they’re a total crapshoot.

Sometimes a relative of the precinct commission chair arrives as the Civic Chamber observer. Other times, someone shows up who immediately starts acting like an observer rather than a bystander and genuinely helps the independent observers.

I don’t really understand how the Civic Chamber selects them, but because there are so many, you do occasionally find honest people among its “observers.” Unfortunately, that’s rare. More often, they turn a blind eye to fraud. Obviously, a relative of the commission chair will side with the commission, not the law.

— What else should people know about voting this year?

— Ever since the COVID era, voting has taken place over three days. It’s best to vote on the last day, Sunday, because the ballots are placed in sealed storage bags between voting days. After the last election, there were reports that these bags had been opened at night and the ballots inside replaced — despite the observers’ best efforts.

So it’s best to come on the third day. Unfortunately, a number of regions use remote electronic voting, which is best avoided. It’s better to go to a polling station and vote on paper. Ideally, you should cast a paper ballot at the polling station where you’re registered on the third day. You’ll receive two ballots there: one for a candidate in your single-member district and one for a party.

But if that isn’t possible — if voters are abroad, for example — then remote electronic voting is acceptable. It is being used in 33 regions this time.

— Is there no way to reverse the effects of fraud in remote electronic voting?

— I have no idea how it could be done. During the last State Duma elections, candidates filed complaints in court — but we know how the courts work. So unfortunately, nothing can be done for now.

In theory, if an enormous number of people suddenly came to polling stations and voted on paper, the prearranged, manipulated online results might not outweigh the paper-ballot vote. I don’t rule out that possibility. But is that likely to happen in this particular election? Probably not.

Still, we know in advance how many voters there are at each polling station, and that number cannot change dramatically during the election. If, after the paper and online results are combined, we see an anomalous increase in the number of voters, that will be the clearest possible sign that a huge number of fraudulent votes were added to the online tally.

— Who is signing up as an independent observer these days?

— Mostly neighborhood activists and young people. I’m speaking only from what I see in my own district. I can’t say what it’s like elsewhere. After all, 2022 dealt an enormous blow to the civic movement. As I said, a great many people left the country.

The influx of young people doesn’t make up for the losses in the election-monitoring movement. Overall interest is declining. Few people stay involved year after year.

— But you still find it meaningful?

— I’ll quote a good song: “In my city, the hardest job is loving someone, but somebody has to do it.” In other words, if we aren’t there, no one will ever know what happens at the polling stations.

No one will ever know what the country’s citizens really think. This is a very subtle point. I very much want the government in this country to change, but I really don’t want anyone to die. I don’t want a bloody regime change. Elections are the only realistic way for power to change hands without bloodshed. And if a window of opportunity ever opens when we can actually make a difference, it will have been worth all the time we had to spend waiting.

In any case, even now, we make things difficult for the authorities at polling stations. I believe it is right to make things difficult for the system of government that has emerged in our country.

Finally, if we all live to see the government truly change someday, elections will still have to be held. You might say we’re keeping the knowledge of how to conduct fair elections from being lost.

Here’s an example that comes to mind: Scientists today are trying to understand how the Egyptian pyramids were built. We shouldn’t let things reach a point where people in the future have to figure out how to hold elections. There should be people who know and remember how to conduct them and what to do to ensure they are fair. The more people like that there are, the easier things will be in the future.

Russians lost real elections a long ago. But you’ve still got a choice. If you live outside Russia, please donate to Meduza — for yourself or for those who remain inside the country and want to read independent news.