Mahiliou observer asks the National Academy of Sciences to check the theory of probability

2012 2012-10-05T16:55:15+0300 1970-01-01T03:00:00+0300 en The Human Rights Center “Viasna” The Human Rights Center “Viasna”
The Human Rights Center “Viasna”

Aliaksei Paulouski, a former election observer at polling station #53 of the Mahiliou-Central election constituency #85, submitted an appropriate letter to the National Academy of Sciences. The reason for the address was the data of the election at his polling station which made him doubt in the theory of probability.

“It is not the first time when I observe elections at this polling station. This time the commission was formed of new people, that's why the commission tried to keep to the procedure of vote calculation. Unlike other polling stations, only several dozens of people voted at my polling station. The votes from each ballot box were calculated separately, which wasn't done at other polling stations,” commented Aliaksei Paulouski.

However, when the ballot box for early voting was opened – 880 ballots were taken out of it, and 560 ballots were taken out of the box for the election day.

“Naturally, 880 people (60% of the electorate) couldn't vote early. One could see it by the fact that the ballots were falling out of the box in accurate batches. As it was found during the poll, during the early voting 680 people voted in support of the pro-governmental candidate, prosecutor Eduard Siankevich, 60 – for candidate Kuzmina and the remaining 140 votes were given for other candidates or “against all”. “However, when the ballots from the election day were calculated, there were 180 votes for Siankevich and 150 for Kuzmina. Thus, the ratios in the first and the second instance are 1:10 and 1:1 respectively.”

Here's the paradox: how such a difference can occur at all? Being unable to solve this miracle on his own, the observer decided to apply to the National Academy of Sciences for assistance.

“Human Rights Defenders for Free Elections”