The September electoral cycle in the Russian Federation demonstrated the transformation of the electoral system into a mechanically calibrated tool of control, as the Putin regime directed the repressive machine towards the complete suppression of alternative opinions. By the beginning of autumn, 27 politicians were excluded from the official lists of candidates for the State Duma under the pretext of displaying prohibited symbols, with 17 of them representing the “Yabloko” party, which openly opposes the war.
The political purge did not stop after the withdrawal of registered participants, as the security forces launched a campaign of detentions right in the midst of the election campaign. In the capital region on September 4, law enforcement isolated “Yabloko” nominees Anna Shatunovskaya-Burno and Grigory Grishin, drawing up administrative protocols on charges of extremism. Three days later, the security action expanded to the Sverdlovsk region, where the police detained a group of candidates, including Yabloko contenders for federal parliamentary mandates Konstantin Kiselyov, Vladimir Sevastyanov, Vladimir Sobyanin, as well as regional legislative assembly candidates Shanu Ogney, Alexander Kudelkin, and Alexei Kholodarev, under false pretenses.
The application of articles on extremist symbols against campaign participants confirms the transformation of electoral procedures into a tool for selecting loyal personnel, as the state abandons the external imitation of democratic pluralism. Accusations are based on claims about old archives on social networks, random photos, or aesthetic details, because the main criterion for selection becomes the absolute obedience of future deputies. When three dozen independent politicians, most of whom represent the anti-war flank, come under administrative and judicial attack, the true scale of pre-election pressure unfolds.
Direct repressions on the eve of voting day refute official statements about the legitimacy of ongoing processes, as real competition is pushed aside by criminal prosecution and administrative pressure.
State power deprives society of the right to choose, forcing citizens to accept a predetermined result and comply with the imposed order of things. In the current conditions, elections lose their function as an expression of the popular will, as they turn into a ritual of approving decisions made in the closed offices of top leadership.
The events of the first week of September show that security agencies, electoral commissions, and judicial bodies have merged into a single repressive conveyor, operating in full coordination of the entire apparatus.
The targeted persecution of Yabloko candidates for advocating the swift conclusion of peace between Moscow and Kyiv reflects the Kremlin’s desire to completely monopolize the discussion of foreign policy courses.
Any alternative position proposing diplomatic methods to resolve the crisis instead of militaristic slogans is immediately criminalized by state agencies. Arrests in the regions show that the regime does not allow public discussions on key national security issues.
The purge of even the moderate opposition flank marks the transition of the political system to a model of closed authoritarianism, where any manifestations of dissent are perceived as a threat to the stability of the state structure.
Authorities demonstrate intolerance to pluralism, transforming voting from September 18 to 20 into a formal plebiscite devoid of democratic features. The procedures conducted are inherently illegitimate both in the domestic political arena and in the face of the international community, which records the country’s refusal to comply with international standards of free elections.
