Download PDF - Real Instituto Elcano

In general, these last elections seem to indicate a setback in the administration of elections.Technical management and election commissions’ difficulties in making the results official inseveral countries have caused serious doubts about these institutions in two respects: 1) theirimpartiality and 2) with regard to the technical efficiency of the vote-counting and the broadcastingof the results. In a region where complaints of fraud, manipulation and inefficiency by electoralbodies had decreased significantly, the questioning of these institutions and of the transparency ofelection-related acts amounts to a serious institutional setback.These problems also led to greater dependence on international observer and monitor missions toguarantee electoral decisions, although at times their evaluations were also called into question. Forexample: Hugo Chávez’s refusal to allow an observer mission from the OAS for the legislativeelections of December; the PRD’s questioning of a European Union observer mission in Mexico,and Correa’s objections to an OAS mission in Ecuador. In Nicaragua, early on in the process,Ortega questioned the representative of the OAS mission, but later an intervention by the OASsecretary general resolved the impasse.Citizen perception of electionsAccording to the Latinobarómetro 2006, during this year people’s perception that elections wereclean rose: the figure went from 37% in 2005 to 41% in 2006. At the same time the perception thatelections were fraudulent declined from 54 to 49%. 21 However, much work remains to be done inchanging people’s perceptions: there were only five countries (Costa Rica, Chile, Panama, Uruguayand Venezuela) where a majority said elections are clean. In the other 13 countries of the region,this opinion is held by less than 50% of voters (the last time elections were held).21 On this issue it is of particular interest to wait for the Latinobarómetro 2007 to see how complaints of electoralfraud in 2006 are reflected in Latin Americans’ perceptions.19