Venezuela sees unfair voting practices and manipulation once more

The decadence of the electoral institutions in Venezuela has placed the whole system in check; a system that since 2004 had been a synonym for exactness. There had never been a single inconsistency between the printed election returns and the digital counts of the machines.  Until 2017.

The last two elections carried out in the country (National Constituent Assembly in July, and governors in October) have been negative landmarks; both events have seen unfair voting practices and manipulation abound.

In the case of the Constituent Assembly, we wrote that the process broke with the electoral dynamic that had been built in the country since 2004, the year they automated their elections, since the forms adopted by the National Electoral Council (CNE) were questioned by experts and politicians both in the country and abroad. Meanwhile, Smartmatic, the company that provided Venezuela with voting technology for 14 years, denounced that the CNE presented results different from those the system had tallied.

Now, in the recent governor elections of October 15th, an avalanche of irregularities took place to benefit a single political sector.  The Venezuelan Electoral Observatory (OEV) not only stated that the CNE “acted for the benefit of the Government’s political interests, which legitimizes the doubts certain sectors of the population have about the announced results”, but also kept an inventory of the anomalies detected before and during the election.

Some of these events previous to the election include the following: the date of the elections was decided illegally and arbitrarily, 42 political parties were declared illegal, it took a over a month after the elections were announced to publish a final date for the event and its electoral schedule, 33 activities were eliminated from said schedule, 17 activities regarding the election were carried out before it had even been officially announced, no substitutions were allowed for the candidates who dropped out, the voter registry was modified outside legal time limits, the CNE eliminated 76 polling centres and 7 thousand stations without previous notice, and less than a week before the vote it relocated 274 polling centres, affecting some 700 thousand voters.

All these irregularities have been studied by analysts in the country, who point that the CNE’s work and the government’s actions were aimed to grant advantages and “manipulate” the process to guarantee a government victory. Voices abroad support this thesis; for instance the Lima Group, made up of 12 countries, denounced irregularities, intimidation and manipulation, and demanded an audit of the vote.

The peak of these accusations has been the delay with which the CNE presented results in Bolivar state, and the results it made public.  Three days after the vote, it declared the government candidate the winner, with a margin of barely 2 thousand votes. This would not be a problem in itself, except the results showed (for the first time in the nation since they automated their vote) numerical inconsistencies in polling stations, as election returns were manually fed into the system instead of the automated tallies – a proof of tampering by the CNE. Smartmatic made it clear that they did not supply any products or services for this event.

Following the accusation of opposition candidate Andrés Velázquez, in total, the CNE added 2,066 votes for the government candidate in 11 polling stations (all of which were manually tampered with): just enough votes so he could “win” the election. Velázquez states that “11 voting machines did not transmit their results (which was unexplained), and their counts were manually loaded, and changed”.  This situation is perfectly summarized in a post by journalist Luis Carlos Díaz (Spanish).

An example of this practice happened at the Caroní Elementary School, where according to the CNE’s website, Justo Noguera (proclaimed as governor) allegedly received 502 votes. The election return for machine N3 in this centre shows he only got 138, thus showing an unexplained difference of 364 votes.

All these facts led the National Assembly to declare the election as fraudulent, and demand “the execution of an integral audit, qualitative and quantitative, of the whole process by international organisms and independent experts”.  However, the CNE considered that October 15 saw one of “the best voting events the country has ever had”.

Reviewing what happened during the votes for the Constituent Assembly and for governors, it is evident that Venezuela has resorted to abuses and illegal acts to do away with an automated voting model that protects the will of the voters, is based on cutting-edge technology and has witnesses for every stage of the process.

The cost of these actions has already generated internal and external mistrust of the CNE and the results it presents, but their impact will be even more evident in future elections, both in terms of turnout and the stances taken by political parties.

After the damage done, it is up to the efforts of authorities, political agents and voters to see the country has clean elections again, stopping electoral tampering before and after the event.


Trial by fire for Peruvian e-voting in December

During the 2016 Peruvian presidential elections, both manual and e-voting had setbacks, the former due to its inability to cope with the challenges posed by close margins (i.e. the need for a quick and precise count), and the latter due to a lack of technology updates.

Having this poor performance as a reference, the Peruvian e-voting model will experience a trial by fire in December, during the country’ s municipal elections, given that its effective use could be the push the country needs to finally embrace its full adoption, or end up paralyzing it.

In this new channel, the National Office for Electoral Processes (ONPE), has decreed that 12 districts will use an e-voting model (in-person) designed by the office to choose some of the 18 mayors and 90 aldermen.

Another six locations will employ an Automated Counting System (SEA), which uses a computer for the transcription and transmission of results to a tally centre, as opposed to a manual process.

The Peruvian e-voting system consists of a card that must be inserted in the voting machine to activate options on a touchscreen. The voter presses their choice, which the system processes and stores, before printing a voting voucher at the end.

Until now, it is not known whether the electoral organism will perform any upgrades to the automated vote.  Although the ONPE followed the best practices in the region to design their model, the technology has not been updated in years, and they also neglected the logistics and preparation for the process, which in 2016 translated in an almost total lack of information of the voters and poll workers.

Starting from this fact, and 18 months since the last election, there is the hope that the electoral body has corrected these flaws, so they can give the country the secure and transparent process that electoral technology can provide.

The importance of making these changes lies in that, if there is actual progress in the adoption and application of e-voting technology, the noncommittal stance of Peruvian authorities toward e-voting could finally change.

Chile goes to the polls expecting to increase turnout

Chile will hold general elections in a month. Preparations are at a fever pitch, and so are expectations about turnout. The chronic voter abstention in the nation put the spotlight last year on the need to modernize the voting process; in reality no changes have been made for the upcoming November 19th vote.

The Chilean Electoral Service (Servel) reported that to choose the president, 155 deputies, 50 senators and hundreds of regional councils, there is an infrastructure in place that includes 2,156 polling centres, with 42,890 stations in them; abroad, some 110 polling centres with 162 stations will be made available.

According to the organism, everything is set for 14 million Chileans to go to the polls, and revert the electoral apathy seen in their last elections, the October 2016 municipal elections, which saw around 65% abstention.

This figure motivated former president and current candidate Sebastián Piñera and the Avanza Chile Foundation to present the government with a project last year which contemplates “early” voting for future Chilean elections, aiming at increasing turnout and correcting flaws such as their hard-to-handle voting ballots.

The proposal would mean adopting a yet unspecified automated voting system, which would open voting for 15 days before the election and close it 5 days before. It would be designed for both official elections and plebiscites.

Although this initiative gives an opening for the country to bank on their strengths (democratic stability and credible institutions), and make voting easier for their citizens through technology, for now Chile still goes to the polls without even having begun to search for a voting process that boosts turnout and strengthens the system.

Still, knowing that technology is a perk that improves accessibility and simplifies the voting process, this option remains available for future elections.