Two frail democracies tremble in Latin America

Allegations of abuses cast doubt on elections planned this weekend in Venezuela and Peru.

By DAVID ADAMS, PHIL GUNSON and CATHERINE ELTON

© St. Petersburg Times, published May 26, 2000

Latin American democracy, never solid in the best of times, is headed for a rough weekend.

Venezuela's Supreme Court on Thursday ordered the suspension of the country's "mega-elections," due to take place Sunday, after the electoral authorities admitted insurmountable technical problems. The announcement came after mounting reports of electoral abuses and political intimidation by the ruling party.

But in Peru, that country's top election body ruled on Thursday that a contentious presidential runoff vote would go ahead as planned Sunday, despite calls for a delay from international observers. The election is being boycotted by the only opposition candidate, who alleges massive government fraud.

The two elections are arousing concern among leaders in the hemisphere who fear both countries are in danger of losing democratic legitimacy.

Former military officer Hugo Chavez led a failed military coup in Venezuela before winning election in 1998. In Peru, Alberto Fujimori is seeking a controversial third term. Both populist leaders are accused of abusing state resources to win re-election.

The current electoral crises are being blamed on last-minute computer difficulties, but the longstanding weaknesses in Latin American political systems are at the heart of the matter.

"The single most important political reform ... is to get the electoral system to be transparent, clear, open, legitimate, so that nobody can object to it," Arturo Valenzuela, President Clinton's top adviser on Latin America at the National Security Council, said last week.

Democracies in Peru and Venezuela, as in most of Latin America, continue to be fundamentally undermined by weak institutions and a lack of public confidence. Most critical is the absence of credible vote-counting agencies in either country.

Facing that, Venezuela's cautious approach may prove to be the more responsible.

The postponment of Sunday's vote was an embarrassing setback for Chavez, whose government had been under fire since January for the partisan way in which the election has been organized. Many Venezuelans are upset that members of the National Electoral Council were appointed without consulting opposition political parties.

The Supreme Court decision came in response to a petition by two citizens' groups, the human rights organization Cofavic and Queremos Elegir, meaning "We want to choose." The petition argued that the election council had violated the people's constitutional right to information by allowing last-minute changes on ballot sheets to accommodate shifting political allegiances.

Put simply, they said, the voters would not know how to vote or whom to vote for, in an election with more than 36,000 candidates. Everyone from the president to local council members is running for election or re-election under a new constitution in what amounts to the most complex vote ever attempted in Venezuela.

Although it denied the accusation of unconstitutionality, the election council did not challenge the substance of the petition. Earlier in the day, the official in charge of the electronic voting system, Alberto Cardenas, conceded that "in the most optimistic of cases" the system would be operating with a 10 percent margin of error. He recommended postponing the election until June 25.

The Supreme Court decision marked the culmination of a process marred from the beginning by controversy, chaos and accusations of partiality on the part of the election council, whose members were handpicked in January by the pro-government assembly that drafted the new constitution.

The spectacle was "truly shameful," said television and radio commentator Cesar Miguel Rondon. "They (the council) simply didn't know how to do their job."

International observers also took the view that the chaos was due to incompetence rather than fraudulent intentions. In a statement, a team of observers from the Carter Center in Atlanta said the "problems we have seen up to now are of a technical nature." They added that the causes were "multiple ... including an extremely tight electoral calendar."

This week a dispute erupted between the election council and Electoral Systems & Software of Omaha, Neb., after major problems were detected with the "flash cards" supplied by the company that read the marked ballot papers.

"There is a very real possibility that the machines will reject the ballots or fail to read them, and that our votes will not be recognized," said Miriam Kornblith, a former election official. "The likelihood of a "megadisaster' is ever more real."

As a Venezuelan air force plane was hurriedly dispatched to Nebraska to bring back extra equipment and technicians, election council chairman Etanislao Gonzalez added to the tensions by accusing ES&S of deliberately trying to sabotage the election.

Company officials retorted that the election council had failed to supply a stable database from which to program the flash cards and was still seeking to make changes in the candidates' list up to the last minute. Events took an even uglier turn when personnel from ES&S reported that they had been threatened and insulted by secret police agents. In one case, a pistol allegedly was thrust into the mouth of one American employee of ES&S.

There is growing indignation, especially in opposition circles, over the incompetence of the election council. "Somebody has to pay this bill," said Antonio Ledezma, candidate for re-election as mayor of Caracas. "Somebody here has to give a serious explanation."

But a seemingly unconcerned Chavez said before the petition was heard that a postponement was "probable." Turning as he often does to a baseball metaphor, the president said: "When the (field) is waterlogged, the umpire's wisest decision is to suspend the game."

The situation is perhaps more dire in Peru, where Sunday's election could turn into an uncontested farce.

Thursday's announcement that the vote would take place sparked protests in Lima and other cities. In the capital protesters vandalized the entrance to the national electoral board's office. Police used tear gas to disperse a crowd outside the presidential palace.

A week ago opposition candidate Alejandro Toledo announced he would not run if the election went ahead Sunday. He instead asked for a postponement until June 18, and then only if improvements had been made in the process.

Thursday's decision has created a constitutional crisis, not to mention a dilemma for individual voters. As in many parts of Latin America, voting is obligatory. Failure to do so is punishable by $34 fine.

Although it's too late to remove Toledo's name and photo from the ballots, he has asked voters to stay away from polling stations. For those who can't afford the fine -- most people in Peru -- he has asked they invalidate their ballot by marking it "No to fraud."

All week an observer mission from the Organization of American States sought to have the election postponed on technical grounds. During the first round of elections last month the electoral authority, known as the National Office of Electoral Processes, was widely accused of serious irregularities bordering on fraud.

Despite efforts to correct technical deficiencies, the OAS insisted Thursday that it needed at least 10 days to properly audit the ballot counting system.

Many Peruvians think international monitoring is vital to assure a fair result. The presence of foreign observers is credited with averting fraud in the first round, when Fujimori fell narrowly short of the 50 percent plus one vote needed for outright victory.

But ruling party officials say the election must go ahead on constitutional grounds. "Whether elections are postponed is not a decision of the candidates but of the elections board, and it has been applied according to what the constitution permits," said Francisco Tudela, the ruling party's vice presidential candidate.

"This applies to any country in the world. If you have elections in the United States and someone believes elections should be postponed, would American citizens accept a resolution that doesn't take into account the U.S. Constitution or election laws?"

Although victory for Fujimori now seems assured, it will likely lack domestic and international legitimacy.

For his part, Chavez may have bought some time to rebuild public confidence in the process.

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.