As controversy continues to swirl surrounding the last Ukrainian election, one of the top election officials filed papers with the highest court asking for a "protective order" that would recuse him from being interviewed or testifying due to his status as a high-ranking public official, and accused the voters challenging the results of 'frivolous conduct' and abusive and unnecessary requests of elections officials.

Mr. Bavkwyl serves as party chairman for the re-election effort of Presidential candidate Yanukovich and has been accused of utilizing his influence as an election official to deliver the vote in a key part of Ukraine.

The opposition was quick to point out that no one was above the law in a democracy and that even the President himself would have to testify if called on to do so by the courts or parliament. "Does Mr. Bavkwyl truly feel that as an official serving the public will that he does not have to answer to the same public? If so he would be right at home in the old Soviet system where party officials ruled with impunity!", opposition spokesperson Vitali Yarzab said.

The issues raised during the election and recount and for which the court case is seeking answers from Mr. Bavkwyl include:

• In Faryev, a full recount should have been ordered when the 3% test sample did not match the official vote totals. Instead, based on what county officials said was a recommendation from Mr. Bavkwyl's office, the recount was "suspended" so that they would not have to do a full recount.
  
• Votes on electronic machines provided by a funder of Mr. Yanukovich's switched votes for Yushchenko to Yanukovich multiple times while voters attempted to cast their ballots. This was witnessed by many voters and election officials across multiple precincts and counties.
  
• More votes than registered voters were recorded for Yanukovich in at least one precinct and there were many similar reports of machines malfunctioning on election day. Unfortunately the machines are not equipped to provide a receipt to the voter to ensure the vote was counted and enable a hand recount should it be deemed necessary.
  
• A careful review of nearly 200 precincts in Kolich county revealed a considerable discrepancy between the number of certified absentee votes and the number of registered absentee voters identified in the poll books. The investigation showed some 650 more absentee votes than there were absentee voters identified in the poll books examined. Bavkwyl refused to allow the poll books to be examined prior to the election being certified and the discovery of these types of discrepancies.
  
• In districts that heavily supported the opposition candidate, Mr. Yushchenko, voters were required to wait in lines of up to 8 hours to cast their votes. Mr. Bavkwyl removed voting machines from these precincts and moved them to precincts expected to favor Mr. Yanukovich.
  
• Long established voting locations were moved at the last minute in districts favoring Yushenko and ballots cast provisionally were often discarded for being cast at the wrong location.
  
• A precinct signature book, necessary to verify that the number of votes that were cast, will not be made available to opposition recount observers until four days after the election is certified by parliament per orders of Bavkwyl.
  
• A technician from one of the electronic voting machine companies who wrote voting software used with punch-card machines in 41 of Lyvov province's 88 counties, dismantled Havel County's tabulation computer days before the recount and "put a patch on it." The technician then provided a "cheat sheet" to the board of elections in order to ensure the machine and hand count totals matched.
  
• In the Mysola County town of Conyavk, certified returns show that all but 10 registered voters cast ballots on Election Day. But the election challenge team has already identified more than 10 registered Conyavk citizens who did not vote, an incongruity that may point to election fraud.
  
• The companies who provided the electronic voting machines have consistently refused requests to examine the source code and it had been demonstrated prior to the election by voting rights activists that it is relatively easy to hack the vote.