The Role of the Media International experts who observed the electoral campaign as portrayed by Russia's media were generally impressed with the fairness of coverage. Television stations generally followed regulations providing for even coverage of the different political parties. Parties wishing to buy television time were allowed to do so. International NGOs and other institutions that were present in Russia in the months prior to the election reported favourable conditions regarding media access. Still, some noted that in the early campaign period several news outlets critical of the government were closed or threatened with closure. At the end of the campaign, government-imposed censors restricted criticism of the constitution. Campaign Financing Observers who analysed the electoral law and regulations concerning campaign financing called attention to several inconsistencies in the system. In short, none of the parties asked could say exactly where their financial support originated, nor could they say exactly how these funds were spent. Nor were they compelled to: the electoral law calls for a general report of campaign expenditures only after the election is completed, so accusations of unfair distribution of government resources to parties supportive of the government remain unsubstantiated. Observers recommended clearer guidelines for reporting on campaign finances in future contests. Election Day Irregularities Virtually every international observer who reported his findings to the ODIHR noted some level of irregularities in election day procedures. These flaws generally related to ballot security and voting secrecy: -- Ballot boxes at some voting stations were not properly sealed. -- Many voters were not given the opportunity to vote in an enclosed, private area. Several voters often filled out ballots while sitting together at a plain table. -- The control of ballot papers by local election officials was sometimes slipshod. Some officials were observed handing multiple ballots to individual voters. So-called "family voting" was not uncommon; several family members often voted together or one family member sometimes voted for several relatives. -- The ODIHR support office in Moscow received complaints directly from some polling sites outside the Russian Federation, notably at military bases elsewhere in the former Soviet Union. It is recommended that, in future contests, particular attention be paid by international observers, possibly by embassies of CSCE states in these countries, to electoral procedures as they pertain to Russian citizens voting outside the territory of the Russian Federation. Despite these flaws and irregularities, international observers came away from the elections with the general impression that the contest was fair and that it provided the Russian voter with the opportunity to express freely a preference for both the constitution and future representation in parliament. Observers noted that the above problems were a reflection of Russian history and geography, not to mention the difficulties facing the administrators of the first democratic parliamentary election in one of the world's largest countries. Malfeasance was not considered to be the inspiration for the administrative flaws observed, but observers expressed the hope that future election in Russia would be managed with greater attention to ballot security and voting secrecy. Any report on election administration would not be complete without mention of the fact that, early in the electoral process, national electoral authorities were open to comments from international experts. They allowed international review of the draft electoral law and accepted and implemented some of the suggestions regarding ballot security and voting secrecy on a local level. Voter Education and Political Development CSCE ODIHR BULLETIN Vol. 2, No. 1 21