According to the ad hoc Committee by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, "the elections were generally well administrated and reflected the consistently high public approval rating of the incumbent president but lacked elements of a genuine democratic contest."

Criticizing the election campaign, the Committee claimed as "unreasonable hurdle" the requirement to collect 2 million signatures for submission to the CEC in support of persons seeking registration as candidates.

PACE reported that despite some irregularities, "credit should be given to the election administration which ensured security and professional conduct of the voting process".

Considering situation in Chechnya, the Moscow Times quoted election officials in the republic's capital, Grozny, as acknowledging that they had filled in several thousand ballots for Putin.

According to the report by Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE) of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, Television is the main source of public information in the Russian Federation.

While the other candidates had access to television and other media, through free airtime and televised debates, their access to the primetime news programmes and current affairs programmes on the State-controlled broadcasters was limited… In contrast to the coverage by State-funded TV channels, private broadcasters monitored by the EOM provided more balanced coverage, with a greater diversity of views.

[5] TV Centre, a television station that was controlled by the Moscow City administration, provided an hour and 25 minutes of coverage to Putin, with the tone being overwhelmingly positive.

[5] In its analytical news programs, such as Svoboda Slova and Namedni, NTV gave a relatively balanced picture of the main contestants and the State leadership.

[6] Yabloko's leader Grigory Yavlinsky specifically called for boycotts to take place in protest of what he considered to be "the slide of the country into authoritarianism".