G. Electoral deposits for presidential candidates
As noted above, the amount of the electoral deposit for a presidential candidate has been increased from a thousand-fold to “a five thousand-fold amount of the calculated index established by the legislation”. This is interpreted to mean 5,000 times the minimum monthly wage. This could prevent the candidacy of many individuals due to their economic or social standing. It also creates the perception that the law only permits the wealthy to participate as candidates in elections. The right to participate in government, including the right to be a candidate for president, should be broad, inclusive, and not limited to a few members of society. In addition, a high electoral deposit may have a discriminatory impact on women, as women are often economically disadvantaged in comparison with men. The fact that the deposit is refundable after the elections to candidates who receive a certain percentage of votes does not remedy the problem. The Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR previously recommended that the amount of the electoral deposit be carefully considered. The draft law, instead of lowering the amount of the electoral deposit, increases the amount of the electoral deposit while still retaining a requirement for 30,000 supporting signatures of voters. The OSCE/ODIHR and the Venice Commission recommend that the amount of the electoral deposit be lowered and that the combined requirement of signatures and an electoral deposit be removed from the law, and that registration requirements may be met through either the collection of signatures or payment of an electoral deposit.
 See “Consolidated Summary and Chair’s Conclusions, OSCE Human Dimension Seminar, Participation of Women in Public and Economic Life,” 13-15 May 2003. Available at: www.osce.org/documents/odihr/2003/07/518_en.pdf. See also OSCE/ODIHR Handbook for Monitoring Women’s Participation in Elections at http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/35151.