View Document - Instituto Interamericano de Derechos Humanos

Transcription

SERIE
CUADERNOS DE
CAPEL
51 CAPEL
CUADERNOS DE
Elections, democracy, and human rights
in the Americas
2006 analytical report
ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY, AND HUMAN RIGHTS
IN THE AMERICAS
2006 ANALYTICAL REPORT
SERIE
CUADERNOS DE
CAPEL
ELECTIONS, DEMOCRACY, AND HUMAN RIGHTS
IN THE AMERICAS
2006 ANALYTICAL REPORT
IIHR - CAPEL
Inter-American Institute of Human Rights
Center for Electoral Promotion and Assistance
2007
First Edition
© IIHR - CAPEL, Costa Rica, 2007
The ideas expressed by the authors in CUADERNOS DE CAPEL, not necessarily
correspond to the ones by IIHR / CAPEL
364.67
I59a
Instituto Interamericano de Derechos Humanos.
Elections, democracy and human rights in the Americas
2006: analytical report / Instituto Interamericano de
Derechos Humanos. -- San José, C.R. : Corte IDH, 2007.
64 p. ; 13 x 21 cm. -- (Cuadernos de CAPEL ; no. 51)
ISBN: 978-9968-917-66-7
1. Derecho electoral 2. Democracia 3. Elecciones 4.
Derechos humanos I. Título.
All or part of this publication may be reproduced, subject to the condition that is not
been altered, credits are entirely considered, and a copy of the publication or
reproduction is sent to the editor.
Publishing Team
Roberto Cuéllar M., IIHR Executive Director
José Thompson, Director, Center for Electoral Promotion and Assistance
Academic Coordination
Óscar Álvarez Araya
Consultant
Marisol Molestina
Coordinator Information and Editorial Service Unit
Information and Editorial Service Unit
Prepress
Masterlitho S.A.
Printer
Inter-American Institute for Human Rights
P.O. Box 10.081-1000 San José, Costa Rica
Phone: (506) 234-0404 Fax: (506) 234-0955
e-mail: uinformacion@iidh.ed.cr
www.iidh.ed.cr
Content
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
Brief analysis of presidential elections in each country . . . . . . .14
An unprecedented and marathon-like electoral agenda . . . . . . .27
Perception of democracy and political parties in 2006 . . . . . . .31
Towards the end of the presidential system?
Challenges, risks and dangers of the presidential role . . . . . . . .32
Elections and electoral institutionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42
As a conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60
Bibliography and information sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62
7
Introduction
1. Many events have been taking place at a fast pace in Latin
America and the Caribbean during the first quarter of the year 2007.
However, due to such facts and the haste of the events, we cannot
omit the 40 elections – 12 presidential, 4 runoffs, 14 parliamentary,
6 of municipal government, 2 referendums, and 2 special ones. In
an organized manner and within a busy political agenda, these elections were carried between November 27, 2005, starting with the
Republic of Honduras, and December 3, 2006, finishing with the
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. To this long list, three elections
in the American Caribbean (Surinam –May 2005–, Jamaica April
2005–, and Santa Lucia –December 2006– since Haiti is considered
part of Latin America in this Report) and two in North America
(Canada and the U.S) have to be added. The Inter-American
Institute of Human Rights (IIHR) monitored these elections through
its Center for Electoral Promotion and Assistance (CAPEL), which
is the Technical Department of the Inter-American Union of
Electoral Bodies (UNIORE) and of the two regional protocols
(Association of Electoral Bodies of Central America and the
Caribbean, Tikal Protocol, and the Association of Electoral Bodies
of South America, Quito Protocol) that gather more than 25 entities
and electoral agencies worldwide.
As a result of the analysis, the elections were participative at first
sight, without surpassing the voting rates and numbers of the 19921996 period this document refers to, except in some countries. The
general level of participation was of 50% and 40% of abstention.
Data indicate and also warn about the fact that young voters (from
18 to 25 years old) took little part in the elections, compared to the
period mentioned before. This electoral cycle, which we call
9
Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas
unprecedented “marathon”, has modified the political situation in
America. This is reflected in the change of the traditional governmental tendencies of the last decades of the XX century. In general
terms, these election processes with several votes also showed that
political parties believe that elections are worth the effort and that
they can ascend to the electoral stage (or platform) in spite of the
fact that, in some places, uncertainty kept citizens in suspense
because of the similar results and apparent ties, such as in the elections of Honduras, Costa Rica, Peru, and especially in Mexico.
2. Those 40 elections have shown that the hemisphere believes
in democracy: more than 330 million people have voted in Latin
America during those 14 months. Besides being the most evident
proof of exercising the right of political participation, it is also the
indisputable demonstration that elections are now the “path”
towards changes and political transformations. As said before, it is
the most evident proof that political parties now know that competing in America's multiparty scenario is worth the effort despite that
their credibility has decreased and is being questioned. Likewise,
this tendency confirms that the electoral arbiters work well enough.
This is not of less importance if it is compared to the democracy of
25 years ago, which had a precarious electoral institutionalism.
Throughout this election period, a feeling of expectation and
optimism was clearly perceived. In contrast to the first two election
movements that had an impact in the democratization of America
and started in the Republic of Argentina (1983), the elections
reflected more diverse opinions and, in very few cases, polarizations in the calendar that finished on last December 3.
3. This unknown series of elections showed that there has been
progress in the electoral institutionalism. This is not a vain effort for
short-term democracies in countries dominated by dictatorships that
have gained the power through aggressive coups d' état and those
overwhelmed due to insurgent wars. Such phenomena had serious
consequences for human rights. Nowadays, however, Latin
America is the area of the American hemisphere with greater citizen insecurity; the latter is responsible for the considerable amount
10
of murders and kidnappings in several countries. Criminal violence
has exceeded the limits of police authority. As usual, Latin America
is an area where governments suffer from high levels of corruption;
poverty is only surpassed by the one in sub-Saharan Africa, and one
with unmanageable misery rates in at least ten countries of this area.
Accordingly, the image now offered by American democratization is still far from being stable and coherent with the main pillars
of the Rule of Law. Some analysts argue that Latin American
democracy is characterized by an appropriate sum total of votes;
fewer consider that it is a sustainable political success.
Thus, the view we have about regional governments upon the
new political configuration is actually different from the one of the
past. There are now countries opposing each other in conflicting
and contradictory speeches which make foreign affairs tense due to
the conception held about democracy, development, and the exercise of power. In some countries, there is an emphasis in the fact
that democracy is the mass government; therefore, social democracy of law should be highlighted. Others prioritize the principles of
the Rule of Law as pillars of any political system and as protection
of the fundamental rights of any citizenship without any discrimination.
4. Because of the election results, integration processes have
also been renewed. They are now scenarios for agreements and
compromises between countries that clearly aim at taking control of
these regional initiatives to take a stance, which are more evident
and significant in South America. The conditions currently regulating the multilateral dialogue have been represented in the predominance of the interconnection and energy exchange together with the
commotion caused by the high prices of raw materials, especially
petroleum, gas market and other hydrocarbons, and to a lesser
degree, of copper. Nationalizing natural resources, new Bolivarian
alliances, and alternative regional mechanisms now modify the
hemispherical relations between south, central, and Caribbean
regions as well as the agenda with the United States, the most
important business partner of the region.
11
In the past, there were political differences. Nevertheless, clear
discrepancies between several countries and patterns of different
groups about a development model as well as about the type of
international insertion that is more beneficial for their societies are
now evident. At the end of this vast election period, in Latin
America, there are different opinions and expectations, tendencies
full of electoral energy therein referendums are emphasized; these
reflect an improvement, at least, compared to the disappointing
years of political frustrations and democratic deterioration since the
fall of communism (1990). Nowadays, in this new century aggravated by the 9/11 (2001), American countries tend towards elections
as an essential way to participate in political decisions and changes
precisely the same day therein the 34 States part of the system of the
Organization of American States (OAS) signed the Inter-American
Democratic Charter in Lima, which established specific institutions
for the collective protection of the hemispherical democracy for the
first time.
5. The IIHR and our electoral department CAPEL have compared and observed the evolution of democracy and elections
through these 40 electoral processes. Elections and participation;
elections and government; organization and electoral law are the
fields of expertise thereon we have prepared a first balance of this
unknown democratic period that shall be the beginning of new
times.
Public interest in the elections was strong, and participation, in
contrast to other periods, was organized and intense although it did
not increase as required for the political regional development.
Different styles and governmental practices generally predominated
during the campaign; this was noticeable in several processes of
hesitation on the part of voters. However, the busy electoral agenda
was chronologically followed. Some campaigns experienced great
commotion, and we were witnesses of the exasperating situations
related to figures and political personalities who have changed the
hemispherical election scenario. We confirmed that education
regarding democracy values takes a secondary role in most countries that participated in the electoral contests. Nevertheless, there
12
were other ways to go into politics. Now, an interest aroused with
respect to the direct way of using the system and the internet in the
election campaign, which needs to be followed in order to foresee
the interactive future of citizens' participation.
On our part, as an entity dedicated to the support to human rights
accepted by the States in America and to the values of the InterAmerican Democratic Charter, and therefore renewing the role of
the Technical Department of Inter-American Union of Electoral
Bodies (UNIORE) which was granted to us by the national electoral
institutions and their regional protocols, we long for the new election processes and referendums coming in the years 2007 and 2008,
as a way to support the hemispherical electoral law and Section 23
of the American Convention of Human Rights (CADH). In this
manner, democracy shall be more effective as citizens' right to vote
and children's access to education of human rights and democratic
values are promoted from the first school years in countries that are
part of the hemispherical organization.
Roberto Cuéllar M.
Executive Director
13
Brief analysis of
presidential elections in each country
Considering the forty election processes, we shall examine presidential elections in order to analyze more deeply the operation of
electoral and political processes during this period. For the sake of
comprehension, a synoptic chart containing general information
about the electoral processes under study is presented as follows; it
is accompanied by a brief analysis of each country.
Honduras
The eighth general consecutive elections were carried in
Honduras on November 27, 2005 upon the restoration of democracy in 1980. The result was the victory, by a slim margin, of the former minister Manuel Zelaya, candidate of the opponent Liberal
Party of Honduras (Partido Liberal de Honduras, PLH), who
obtained 51% of the valid votes. Congress former president Porfirio
Lobo was the candidate of the governing and conservative National
Party (Partido Nacional), which obtained 46% of the vote. Far from
reaching this point, there were the leftist Democrat Unification, the
14
Christian Democratic Party of Honduras (Partido Demócrata
Cristiano de Honduras), and the Social Democratic Innovation and
Unity Party (Partido Innovación y Unidad, PINU), with 1% each.
In the legislative elections, the Liberal Party won 62 seats, the
National Party 55, Democratic Unification 5, Christian Democracy
4, and Innovation and Unity (PINU) 2, out of a total of 128.
The Liberal and National Parties have dominate the Honduran
political scene for more than a century. In the seven general elections carried during the last twenty five years, the Liberal Party has
won five times, whereas the National Party achieved victory in two
opportunities. With the result of the last General Elections, the
bipartisan system that has characterized this country was maintained.
Bolivia
The sixth general elections after democracy was reinstalled in
1982 were held on December 18, 2005. The indigenous union and
emerging leader Evo Morales, candidate of the opponent Movement
for Socialism Party (Movimiento al Socialismo, MAS) obtained an
overwhelming victory, with 54% of total valid votes cast. In second
place was Jorge Quiroga, candidate for the right-of-center coalition,
Social Democratic Power (Poder Democrático Social, PODEMOS),
with 29% of the vote, while the National Unity Front (Frente de
Unidad Nacional, FUN) obtained 8%, and the Revolutionary
Nationalist Movement (Movimiento Nacionalista Revolucionario,
MNR) obtained only 6%.
The result meant a change of direction toward an election option
that was defined as socialist, allied to the Bolivarian regional trend
and willing to implement strategic company nationalizations and
conducting an agrarian reform. Evo Morales is the first indigenous
head of state in Bolivia’s history.
The multiparty system prevailed with two large and two small
parties, but the political force balance changed radically. After elections, a relative instability has prevailed in the country, where new
elements have been added, such as the confrontation between the
15
richest departments and the central government. Election results
allowed MAS to control the Chamber of Deputies but not the
Senate; moreover, for the first time in history, departmental governors, known as prefects, were popularly elected; prefects represent
the first political authority of departments.
Chile
Presidential and parliamentary elections took place in Chile on
December 11, 2005. The former Minister of Health and Defense
Michelle Bachelet was victorious; she was the candidate of the ruling Coalition of Parties for Democracy (Concertación de Partidos
por la Democracia), formed by the Socialist Party, the Party for
Democracy, and the Christian Democracy Party. Second place was
for Sebastián Piñera, from National Renewal (Renovación
Nacional) (right), and third place was for Joaquín Lavín, from the
Independent Democrat Union (Unión Demócrata Independiente)
(right too).
A runoff election was held on January 15, 2006; Michelle
Bachelet was victorious with 53.50% of the vote, followed by
Sebastián Piñera, who obtained 46.50%. Her victory makes her the
first woman to become President of the Republic of Chile, and this
victory results as well in the fourth consecutive administration of
the Coalition since democracy was reinstalled. After the authoritarian government of General Augusto Pinochet, the Coalition started
with two governments led by Christian-Democrat presidents; it then
continued in office with two socialist presidents, first Ricardo
Lagos and now Michelle Bachelet. The new victory of Coalition
means the continuity of a center-left project and a social market
economy, although with a clearer plan to strengthen social programs. The Coalition also triumphed in the parliamentary elections
and for the first time will have control of Congress. The multiparty
system still remained, but it is important to remember that Chilean
stage is dominated by two main alliances that group the great
majority of parties.
16
Costa Rica
On February 5, 2006, Costa Rica held presidential, parliamentary, and municipal government elections. The former President and
Nobel Peace Laureate Oscar Arias, candidate of the opponent
National Liberation Party (Partido Liberación Nacional) won with a
tight margin. He obtained 40.92% of valid votes cast. The second
place was for the former Minister of Planning, Ottón Solís, who was
the candidate of the Citizen’s Action Party (Partido Acción
Ciudadana, PAC). He obtained 39.80% of votes cast. The
Libertarian Movement (Movimiento Libertario) was third with
8.48% of the vote, and the party that ruled during the last two
administrations, the Social Christian Unity Party (Partido Unidad
Social Cristiana, PUSC) dropped to the fourth place, with 3.55% of
the vote, and this became its worst result in history.
In elections to the Legislative Assembly, the unicameral national legislature, the National Liberation Party obtained 36.54% of
votes, while the Citizen’s Action Party obtained 25.34%, the
Libertarian Movement 9.17%, and the Social Christian Unity Party
obtained 7.82%.
During the election campaign, candidate Óscar Arias actively
promoted the Central American Free Trade Agreement with the
United States, which was negotiated and signed during the previous
Social-Christian administration. PAC is a party founded six years
ago, and it became the option of those who opposed the re-election
of Oscar Arias and the ratification of the Free Trade Agreement.
This time, the election result was very different to what polls
were saying, and the PAC took some weeks before accepting such
results.
The Costa Rican Election System faced the tension caused by a
very tight result. The bipartisan model formed by the National
Liberation Party and the PUSC was replaced by a new multiparty
system, formed by two large parties, two small parties, and a few
parties represented by only one deputy. The new ruling party did not
obtain simple majority in the Legislative Assembly.
17
Haiti
Presidential elections were held on February 7, 2006. Victory
was obtained, in first round, by René Preval, former President and
candidate of the Front of Hope Party. (Front de l’Espoir ), who
obtained 51.21% of the vote. Preval is the only head of state in
Haiti’s history who, after having been democratically elected, was
able to complete his mandate and voluntarily handing power over to
his successor. He was an opponent of the Duvalier family dictatorship and was a member of the Fanmi Lavalas Party, whose leader is
the former president Jean Bertrand Aristide.
Lesly Manigat, from the Rally of Progressive National Democrats (Rassemblement de Démocrats Nationaux Progressistes)
obtained a quite distant second place, with 12.40% of the vote.
Aristide had been elected President of the Republic with 92% of the
vote during the previous Presidential elections, held on November
26, 2000.
The 2006 elections were very controversial and generated fraud
accusations from many candidates, including, at some point, Preval
himself. These elections were delayed four times due to the violent
and unsteady situations that attempted against successful development of elections. In short, this was the only case, during this electoral year, in which the agenda was completely altered. At the end,
the electoral council distributed blank votes among the participating
candidates, which allowed the victory of Preval in first round.
Nevertheless, Preval’s victory and the beginning of his term represent a return to democratic normality, which had been interrupted
by the coup d’etat or resignation (according to different versions) of
Jean Bertrand Aristide in 2004.
Colombia
Colombia held presidential elections on May 28, 2006. Álvaro
Uribe Vélez was re-elected as President of the Republic. He
obtained a resounding a victory, with 62.35% of the votes. Uribe
became the first Colombian president in over 100 years that was
consecutively re-elected. Way behind, the second place was for
18
Carlos Gaviria, from the Alternative Democratic Pole (Polo
Democrático Alternativo), with 22.03% of the vote, the largest vote
ever for a leftist candidate. The third place was for the lawyer
Horacio Serpa, from the Liberal Party (Partido Liberal), who
obtained 11.84% of votes.
In this case, continued discourses against drug dealing, paramilitarism, and guerrillas led to victory. Although Uribe made his political career in the Colombian Liberal Party (Partido Liberal
Colombiano), he separated from his party in 2002, presenting himself as an independent liberal presidential candidate and attaining
victory in that moment with 53% of the vote.
The liberal-conservative bipartisan model that characterized
Colombia for more than a century of its history seems to be fading
and giving space to a new multiparty system. Nevertheless, if we
take into account the elections for the Congress of the Republic,
held on March 12, 2006, the Social National Unity Party of
National Union (Partido Social de Unidad Nacional) obtained the
first place, with 1,591,775 votes; the second place was for the
Colombian Conservative Party (Partido Conservador Colombiano)
with 1,470,029; the third place was for the Colombian Liberal Party
(Partido Liberal Colombiano) with 1,436,657 votes; the Radical
Change Party (Partido Cambio Radical) was in fourth place, with
1,211,457, and the fifth place was for the Alternative Democratic
Pole (Polo Democrático Alternativo) with 875,451 votes.
Therefore, we can talk of a multiparty system.
Peru
Peru held national elections on April 9, 2006 to elect President,
members of the Congress, and representatives of the Andean
Parliament. The nationalist candidate, Ollanta Humala, of Union for
Peru Party (Unión por Perú), obtained the first place in the presidential elections, with 25.685% of the vote; the ex-President Alan
García. from the Peruvian Aprista Party (Partido Aprista Peruano,
APRA) obtained the second place with 20.406%, and the third place
was for the social Christian Lourdes Flores, from National Unity
19
Party (Unidad Nacional), with 19.979%. Despite each candidate’s
variations, none of them were close to the government.
In the second presidential round, held on June 4, 2006, Alan
García was victorious, with 52.625% of the vote, and Humala
obtained 47.375%. In this way García became one of the four former Presidents of the Republic that managed to be re-elected. The
others were: Óscar Arias in Costa Rica, Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua,
and René Preval in Haiti.
García’s case should draw the analysts’ attention since his personality and his political party had been characterized, sometime
ago, as from the past. In Peru, APRA and García’s victory represent
a return to one of the traditional politicians, after the long authoritarian period of Alberto Fujimori and the constitutional government
of Alejandro Toledo.
Mexico
Presidential and parliamentary elections in Mexico were held on
July 2, 2006. In this presidential race, Felipe Calderón Hinojosa,
who represented the ruling National Action Party (Partido Acción
Nacional, PAN), obtained, with a tight margin, the first place, with
36.38% of the vote. The candidate of Democratic Revolution Party
(Partido de la Revolución Democrática PRD), Manuel López
Obrador, former Mayor of Mexico City and former leader of the
Institutional Revolutionary Party (Partido Revolucionario
Industrial, PRI), obtained the second place, with 35.34% Third
place was for Roberto Madrazo, from the PRI, with 21.57% of the
vote.
Felipe Calderón had a long political career with the PAN. He
based his political campaign on the idea of generating new jobs by
attracting foreign investments.
The victory was then for the ruling party; meanwhile, the threeparty system remained. Mexico represented one of the cases, during
the year 2006, in which the ruling party won. The other cases were
Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Venezuela. In Nicaragua, Costa Rica,
Ecuador, and Peru, the victory was for parties of the opposition.
20
The candidate for PRD did not accept the results notified by the
Federal Electoral Tribunal (Instituto Federal Electoral) and rather
claimed that there had been fraud, which would make illegitimate
the new head of state. Therefore, he organized protests and even
formed a parallel cabinet. The PRI did accept the official results of
election immediately. The final result of the elections was challenged and raised complaints from PRD, and finally, the Electoral
Tribunal of the country made a decision, about eight weeks after the
elections day.
In the elections for senators, the PAN won as well with 33.93%
of the vote (though they did not obtain the majority), while the PRB
obtained 29.77% and the PRI 27.47%. Therefore, a three-partisan
Senate continues to exist, where neither the government nor the
opposition has the majority, and consequently, governability will
still require of complex negotiations.
A similar situation occurred in the elections for deputies, where
PAN obtained 33.70% of valid votes, PRD obtained the second
place with 29.01%, and PRI ended up with 27.66%. After being the
party in office for many decades, PRI has become the second party
of opposition in the Mexican party system. On the other hand, PAN,
after being the opposition party for many decades, has become the
ruling party during two consecutive terms of six years each; in other
words, a total of 12 years. The PRD, which started as a dissidence
from PRI, has now the role of opposition that traditionally belonged
to PAN, but from the left wing of the political spectrum.
Ecuador
General elections were held in Ecuador on October 15, 2006.
Álvaro Nobola, from the Institutional Renewal Party of National
Action (Partido Renovador Institucional de Acción Nacional,
PRIAN), obtained the first place in the presidential elections with
26.83% of the vote. The second place was for an emergent leader,
the economist Rafael Correa, candidate of Proud and Sovereign
Fatherland Alliance (Alianza PAIS), who obtained 22.84%. The
third place was for Gilmar Gutiérrez, from Patriotic Society Party
(Partido Sociedad Patriótica), with 17.42%; the fourth place for
21
León Roldós, from the Democratic Left Party (Izquierda
Democrática), with 14.84%. The fifth place was for Cynthia Viteri,
from the Social Christian Party (Partido Social Cristiano). Other
two parties obtained percentages above 2%, and two more above
1%. In short, it is a fragmentary political scenario in which none of
the forces constitutes a majority by itself. Noboa himself, who
obtained the first place, only obtained a little more than a fourth of
the total vote.
According to projections from pollsters, Noboa was favorite for
the second round, but then his popularity started to fade in middle
of a fierce contest between left and right. On the other hand, Correa
presented an electoral offer more oriented toward the Bolivarian
regional trend and proposing radical changes in the political institutions.
Finally, Rafael Correa’s victory over Álvaro Noboa was clear,
with 56.67% of the vote versus 43.33% for Noboa.
During his campaign, Correa stated that he would not sign the
Free Trade Agreement with USA, that he would expel the US military forces from Manta Airbase, and that he would find out a solution the external debt problem. Regarding other aspects, he did not
present candidates for the Congress claiming that he would convene
a Constituent Assembly. In fact, during his inauguration, he called
for a referendum on the Constituent Assembly.
Correa is Ecuador’s eighth president during the last 10 years;
three of those have not been able to finish their constitutional term
due to conflicts with a Congress that has the constitutional power to
remove the President. After the 2006 elections, Ecuador has kept its
multiparty and fragmentary system.
Brazil
The general elections in Brazil to elect the president of the country, new parliament, and governors of all states were held on
October 1, 2006. In the first round, the former left-winged union
leader and incumbent President of the Republic, Lula da Silva, who
was the candidate for the Worker’s Party (Partido dos
22
Trabalhadores) and his allies, obtained 48.61% of the valid votes.
The second place was for the physician and former Governor of Sao
Paulo Gerardo Alckim, candidate for the Brazilian Social
Democracy Party (Partido da Social Democracia Brasileira of
Fernando Henrique Cardoso) and the Liberal Front Party ), with
41.64% of the vote. In a distant third place came Heloisa Helena for
the Socialism and Freedom Party (Partido Socialismo e Liberdade),
a left-wing split of the Worker’s Party, with a 6.85% of the vote.
Since Lula da Silva did not obtain more than 50% of the votes,
a ballotage was held. In this second round he consolidated his victory, being re-elected as President of the Republic, with an overwhelming 60.83% of the votes against 39.17% obtained by his
opponent Gerardo Alckim. This means more than 20 percentage
points. In this way, the President of Brazil obtained more than 58
million of votes. In 2002, Lula had also defeated José Sierra in the
second round with more than 60% of the votes. Thus, it can be said
that, despite the scandals that stained his first administration, the
numerous resignations and dissidences, and the modest growth that
the economy has had in these years, Lula’s “political capital”
remained intact, and the majority of the people has decided to give
him a second chance.
It is in the Legislative Branch where the outlook is more complex. The Legislative Branch in Brazil is bicameral, composed by
the Chamber of Deputies and the Federal Senate. In the former, the
government’s party (PT) obtained only 83 seats from a total of 513,
gaining a clear minority. Regarding the Federal Senate, only a third
of the seats were renewed, with the PT obtaining 11 from a total of
81. In the senators’ elections, as well as in the federal deputies’ elections, the government’s party obtained a minority of the seats in a
situation of deep fragmentation. For this reason, his second administration is expected to be more difficult than the first, and he will
have to negotiate with other political forces to make governability
possible.
Lula’s first administration was “orthodox” and similar in economics to the IMF, as well as friendly with President Bush. At the
23
same time, he cultivated the friendship with the President of
Venezuela, striking a balance in Latin-American politics. He has
continued to promote the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR) and the Union of South American Nations (Confederación
Sudamericana de Naciones). For his second administration, Lula
has said that his management will not be “populist” but popular, and
that (this time) he will lower the unemployment and poverty rates.
However, Brazil will continue to have a multiparty system and will
continue to be the biggest laboratory of a government that looks forward to social justice in cohabitation with the market and other
international financial organizations.1
Nicaragua
The general elections were held in Nicaragua on November 5,
2006. In the run for the presidency of the Republic, the victory was
for the former guerrilla leader and former President of the Republic
Daniel Ortega Saavedra, candidate for the opponent Sandinista
National Liberation Front (Frente Sandinista de Liberación
Nacional). Ortega obtained 38.07% of the valid votes, three percentage points above the 35% required to obtain victory, according
to the reform made to the Constitution of the Republic of
Nicaragua.
Commander Ortega returned to the presidency after 16 years
during which he was the defeated candidate against Violeta
Chamorro, Arnoldo Alemán, and Enrique Bolaños. For this electoral campaign he presented himself as the candidate of “reconciliation, peace and love”.
In second place came the banker, economist and several times
former minister Eduardo Montealegre, for the Nicaraguan Liberal
Alliance (Alianza Liberal Nicaragüense), with 29% of the votes. In
third place came the former vice-president of the Republic José
1
24
These elections were not object of an international observation mission since
the Brazilian Tribunal did not activate the mechanism of cooperation and reciprocity intended in the Inter-American Network of Electoral Bodies and chose
to send out individual invitations.
Rizo, who represented the Constitutionalist Liberal Party (Partido
Liberal Constitucionalista) led by former president Alemán, obtaining 26.21% of the vote. The fourth place was for the social democrat Edmundo Joaquín, from the Sandinista Renovation Movement
(Movimiento Renovador Sandinista), obtaining 6.44% of the vote.
Meanwhile, in the elections for the National Assembly, which is
made up of 92 deputies, the Sandinista National Liberation Front
obtained 38 seats, the Constitutionalist Liberal Party 25, the
Nicaraguan Liberal Alliance 22, and the Sandinista Renovation
Movement obtained 5 seats. In this context, to obtain the simple
majority of 47 votes, the government’s party will need the votes of
its Constitutionalist Liberal Party allies. In this opportunity, the
bipartisan system was replaced by a three-party system.
Ortega is one of the four former presidents who returns to the
presidency during the 2006 elections. The others were Óscar Arias
in Costa Rica, Alan García in Peru, and René Preval in Haiti.
Ortega has stated that his second administration will be different
from the first because the national and international conditions are
new. After his electoral triumph he has offered an administration of
peace, one that is respectful of the democratic institutional environment, the private industry and the rules of free market. However, he
intends to attract new foreign investment and to continue (despite
his reservations) with the Free Trade Agreement that Central
America subscribed with the United States. He has also shown signs
of conciliation and search for dialogue with the president of the
United States.
At the same time he keeps friendly relations with his historical
allies in Cuba, as well as with the presidents of Venezuela and
Bolivia. In fact, at the beginning of his mandate he signed the adhesion to the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (Alternativa
Bolivariana para la América Latina y el Caribe, ALBA), integrated
by the governments of Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, and now
Nicaragua, the first Central American country to join this initiative,
which they promote in opposition to the Free Trade Area of the
Americas (FTAA).
25
Venezuela
The presidential elections were held in Venezuela on December
3, 2006 showing as a result a clear victory for the incumbent president of the republic Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías, who obtained his
second consecutive re-election as the candidate for the Fifth
Republic Movement (Movimiento Quinta República) obtaining
62.84% of the valid votes. In second place came social democrat
teacher and Governor of the state of Zulia Manual Rosales, candidate for “A New Era” (“Un Nuevo Tiempo”), a vast coalition of parties which united groups from the center-right to the left democracy who are against Cháves’ government. Rosales obtained 36.90%
of the vote. The difference between them was more than 25 percentage points. Cháves obtained the most comfortable victory in
Latin America during 2006, and Manuel Rosales immediately
accepted his defeat.
During the last years, Chávez has been the Latin-American president with the most belligerent rhetoric opposing “neoliberalism”,
“globalization”, and the so called “Washington Consensus”, and
Bush’s administration foreign policy. He has openly opposed to the
invasion of Iraq, the Bush Doctrine, and the “war against terror”. It
can also be said that he has been the most proactive, influential, and
media related leader in Latin America during 2006.
After the elections, the re-elected president announced the
beginning of a new, deeper stage in the construction of the
Venezuelan socialism for the XXI century, which will be inspired in
the ideas of Marx, Lenin, Jesus, and Bolivar. However, Venezuela
continues to function within a private industry economy frame, and
it is still a vital oil supplier for the United States.
In his foreign policy, president Cháves has recently gained two
new, very close allies, one in Central America, and another one in
South America: Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, and Rafael Correa in
Ecuador.
In the Parliamentary elections on December 4, 2006, his party
had already obtained 114 of the 167 seats in the parliament. Other
26
parties that are allied to Cháves obtained the remaining seats, since
the opposition did not present any candidates. In this Parliament,
Cháves announced that he will promote a reformation to the
Constitution to make “indefinite re-election” possible and legal.
After the 2006 elections, Cháves has begun a process of unification of the 23 parties of his coalition that support the “Bolivarian
Revolution” into the United Socialist Party of Venezuela. Regarding
the opposition, it seems to have lost unity after elections, and it
might return to the fragmentation of many political parties.
Venezuela has a multi-party system with one ruling hegemonic
party.
An unprecedented and marathon-like
electoral agenda
For the first time in Latin American history, 12 presidential elections were held from November 27, 2005 to December 3, 2006. If
the four second rounds were to be taken into account, a total of 16
presidential elections held in the course of one year would be
obtained. Votes cast during that period totaled 333,042,867. Over
75% of the population had the opportunity to vote. Nine Latin
American presidents were elected and 4 out of 18 were re-elected.
During this year, presidential elections were held in all South
American countries (except Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay), 3
Central American countries (Honduras, Costa Rica and Nicaragua),
and Mexico.
On the other hand, legislative elections were held in 14 countries: Honduras, Bolivia, Chile, Haiti, Colombia, Mexico, Brazil, El
Salvador, Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Paraguay, Peru,
Ecuador and Costa Rica, in addition to two referendums: one in
Bolivia and the other in Panama. Municipal elections were held in
Honduras (as part of the general elections), El Salvador and
Dominican Republic (in both cases they were held along with legislative elections), Paraguay, Peru and Costa Rica (independently).
27
Governor elections were held along with presidential elections in
Brazil in October and for authorities in the Atlantic Coast in
Nicaragua in March. If, along with the 16 presidential elections, we
add the 14 legislative elections, the 2 referendums, the 6 municipal
elections, the Brazilian governor elections and the specific one, for
the Nicaraguan Caribbean Coast, we would obtain a total of 40 electoral processes held in the region over a year.
28
A vigorous electoral democracy
This unprecedented and full electoral agenda comes to prove
that electoral democracy is a current and vital part of the political
institution in Latin America. Democratic and plurality elections are
the most common, legitimate and consensus means to elect political
authorities in the region. It is important to point out that during such
period, there were no coup d’état or coup attempts and military
power was subject to civil power. That situation brings a special difference when compared with the past –making military power subject to civil power.
The election “marathon” carried out in normal democratic conditions with respect to civil regime and constitutional state confirms
the consolidation of electoral democracy and electoral institutions
in Latin America.
During the period under study, we have encountered improvements, strengths, challenges, setbacks, difficulties and weaknesses
in Latin American democracy and its operating mechanisms, which
will be expressly described below.
More exercise on direct democracy
It is evident, on the other hand, the continuous improvement the
electoral processes have experienced as well as the strengthening of
a direct democracy as the successful referendums held in Panama
and Bolivia shows.
Direct democracy is becoming a reality in the region. It will provide citizens with new participation opportunities, make democratic systems more legitimate and complicate the already numerous
electoral agendas even more. Modern direct democracy includes
new forms of civic participation such as revocations, initiatives in
the formulation of laws, and the referendum.
The referendum “directly calls upon the citizens to immediately
exert, with no influence of representatives, the power of deciding on
a specific topic.”2
2
IIDH-CAPEL. Diccionario Electoral- Volume I. IIDH, San José. Year 2000,
p.38.
29
Direct democracy may complement representative democracy if
developed within a context of constitutional state, ideological pluralism and respect of fundamental rights and freedoms.
Respect for electoral agenda
Except in Haiti, where the election date was postponed four
times, all other countries respected the election date and the electoral agenda overall. This symptom reflects how electoral democracy in Latin America has been institutionalized. According to Butler
(1981), among the main rules of the game for truly democratic elections, it is important to mention that such rules should be recurrent,
accurately scheduled and set within the expected time.
Electoral alternation
From the above-mentioned presidential elections, it can be stated that in seven cases an opposition party won, was proclaimed victorious and took on control of the government. That is, an electoral
alternation took place in Honduras, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Haiti, Peru,
Ecuador and Nicaragua.
In five cases, a government party won the election; thus, no electoral alternation was present in Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Brazil
and Venezuela.
In a study made on presidential elections during the 1992-1996
period, it was determined that from 21 elections, 13 were won by
the opposition and 9 were won by the government party. That is, in
most cases the electoral alternation prevailed.
If we compare the two periods analyzed, we can assert that the
tendency for the opposition to win most of the Latin American elections, to be granted power and obtain an electoral alternation has
been preserved. This symptom mirrors how electoral democracy is
properly working.
30
Perception of democracy and
political parties in 2006
According to data provided by the most recent Latinobarómetro
report (LB 2006), “democracy support” slightly increased from
53% in 2005 to 58% during 2006 –always below the highest level
obtained in 1997: 63%. “Democracy satisfaction” also increased
from 31% in 2005 to 38% in 2006.
Such slight increase in democracy support and satisfaction
might be due to the full electoral agenda comprising 32 electoral
processes and the electoral “honeymoon” with 12 new governments
starting in 2006. Another factor that might be a concurring cause of
said increase is the high economic development in Latin America
during 2006.
In effect, according to figures supplied by ECLAC, the region
had a good economic year with an average growth of 5,3%. From
this report, it was concluded that during 2006, Cuba grew by 12,5%,
Dominican Republic 10%, Argentina 8,5%, Paraguay 7,5%,
Uruguay 7,3%, Peru 7,2%, Costa Rica 6,8%, Colombia 6%, Mexico
4,8%, Chile 4,4% and Brazil 2,8%. This new increase in economic
development had started since 2004. Although such development is
still accompanied by major inequities and Latin America is still the
most unequal region in the world, a certain economic optimism is
held in the region –especially by high and middle classes.
Not all is good news because, according to the Latinobarómetro
report conducted during 2006, 69% of Latin Americans believe
their country is ruled by several powerful groups aiming at their
own benefit only and, despite the democratic election “marathon,”
citizen’s reliability in institutions resulted in 27% for congresses
and 22% for political parties –next-to-last and last institutions
respectively. Among all institutions, political parties are the ones
causing most distrust –reason why they are still “suspected.”
Even though electoral democracy was consolidated through 40
electoral processes carried out in 2006, “political crisis” and political party crisis still continue. Major inequities are still part of the
31
current situation as well as high poverty rates (almost 40%). The
real question is whether democracy will be preserved in a context
of much poverty and social exclusion because, even as stated that
human rights cannot be effective without democracy, democracy
cannot exist without human rights. A poverty rate of 40% restricts
and invalidates the exercise of economic, social and cultural human
rights for a considerably broad section of the population.
This combination of political crisis, congress and political party
distrust, major inequity and high poverty rates might give room for
people in certain countries to search for alternative paths even out
of the representative democracy.
Towards the end of the
presidential system?
Challenges, risks and dangers
of the presidential role
The following paragraphs will show evidence of how the presidential system is coming to an end. Some authors wonder if parliamentary system will be the means to strengthen Latin American
democracies and make them more efficient and governable.
Two decades of low electoral participation
The average electoral participation was 59,26% and absenteeism
was 40,74%,
During the 1988-1991 period, the average electoral participation
was 74,97%. For the 1992-1996 period, the average electoral participation went down 4 percentage points to 71%.
Ten years later, the electoral participation went down again to
over 11 percentage points and now it is 59,26%
That is, in a period covering nearly 20 years, the “Third Wave of
Democracy” in Latin America has experienced a decrease of
32
approximately 15 percentage points in electoral participation (see
Graph 1).3
Graph No.1
Average participation and absenteeism in Latin America
(From 1988 to 1996 and 2006)
Tendency towards a multiparty system, political
fragmentation and complicated governability
As for party system, a two-party system was maintained in several countries whereas a multiparty or three-party system was introduced in others, as shown in the following table:
3
For more information, consult: “América Latina: Balance del período electoral
1992-1996”. Óscar Álvarez, Juan Rial and Daniel Zovatto. Also see Elecciones
y Democracia en América Latina1992-1996. IIDH-CAPEL, 1998.
33
In sum, a multiparty system was maintained in seven countries:
Bolivia, Chile, Haiti, Peru, Ecuador, Brazil and Venezuela. A
change from a two-party system to a multi-party system took place
in Costa Rica and Colombia. From a total of twelve countries, nine
have now a multiparty system.
In one case (Mexico), a three-party system was maintained
whereas in another case (Nicaragua), a change from a two-party
system to a three-party system was made. From a total of twelve
countries, a three-party system was present in two: Mexico and
Nicaragua.
Finally, from the countries under study, the two-party system
persisted in only one (Honduras). The prevailing tendency was the
multiparty system (9 countries) and the second place went to the
three-party system (2 countries).
In a study carried out on all political systems in Latin America,
it was found that from 1992 to 1996, multi-party system was the
predominant tendency (8 countries), three-party system took the
second place (5 countries) whereas two-party system was present in
Honduras, Costa Rica and Colombia (3 countries).
34
After a decade of democratic processes and elections, multiparty system proves to be the prevailing tendency in Latin America.
In general, such system results in a major political fragmentation as
well as a more complicated governability.
Analyzing presidents of the republic:
A new socio-political map of Latin America
Given that all the countries under consideration have presidential systems, it is of the highest importance to know the traits of the
presidents of the Republic since the latter are pivotal figures in
defining the type of cabinet and government resulting from the elections.
Main profession or occupation
If we were to classify the presidents from the twelve elections
under study on the basis of main professions or occupations, the following table would be generated:
Most of them (eight) have a profession. Lawyer is the profession
found the most times.
35
It is worth mentioning that two trade unionists won the elections,
which is completely new for the region’s democratic history.
It is also evident how the number of entrepreneurs now engaged
in politics has decreased –a predominant variant a decade ago.
Entrepreneurs have been replaced by professionals, middle-class
leaders and trade unionists. The time of electoral euphoria, when
citizens trusted in the management capabilities of entrepreneurs
working as politicians seems to be gone. From the cases under
study, only Manuel Zelaya qualifies as an agricultural entrepreneur
because Daniel Ortega and Álvaro Uribe are deemed more professionals and politicians than entrepreneurs.
Gender
As for gender, the list includes eleven male presidents and one
female president: Michele Bachelet, who is the first female president of the Republic in Chilean history.
A decade ago, Violeta Barrios de Chamorro was the only female
president. That is, a tendency for male presidents to hold the highest office of state is still maintained. Nevertheless, there is a difference between Barrios and Bachelet because the former was inherited politics from her husband Pedro Joaquín Chamorro, political
leader and journalist, whereas the latter developed a political career
on her own.
Ethnic origin
As for ethnic origin, Evo Morales, the first indigenous president
of the Republic in Bolivian history, and René Preval, an AfroCaribbean who became president of Haiti for the second time, stand
out.
Political-ideological orientation
It is also interesting to classify presidents of the Republic on the
basis of their political-ideological orientation. There is a group of
left-wing presidents made up of Hugo Chávez, Evo Morales, Rafael
Correa and Daniel Ortega. Along with Cuba, they are members of
the Bolivarian Alternative for Latin America and the Caribbean,
36
known as ALBA Group (Spanish acronym). Despite not being part
of the group, René Preval has a relationship with them.
Lula da Silva and Michele Bachelet might be considered centerleft leaders. Óscar Arias, Manuel Zelaya and Alan García might fall
into the center-president category. Felipe Calderón and Álvaro
Uribe might be deemed center-right leaders.
Such is not a rigid classification because some presidents might
be in one group or another depending on the subject.
In sum, from the twelve elections under consideration, a leftwing party won the elections in five countries (one large-sized and
four small-sized); a center-left party won in two countries (one
large-sized and one medium-sized); a center party won in three
countries (one medium-sized and two small-sized). A center-right
leader won in two large-sized countries.
On the other hand, today’s left party has become “moderate”
when compared with 60’s, 70’s and 80’s left parties. A similar situation applies to center-right and center parties. For instance, today’s
left parties are not armed (except for Colombia) and have a role
within the electoral democratic system.
In many cases, it is evident that parties and movements self-proclaimed Socialist, Marxist, Left or at least Center-left have won the
elections, but when exercising power, they tend to become centeroriented. In short, a tendency for left parties is present in the region,
whereas the ideological spectrum is oriented to the center parties.
However, that five out of twelve elections were won by left parties
for the last year is an undeniable truth.
In addition, classifying the twelve elected presidents on the basis
of political affiliation of their party in international politics results
in the following:
• The government party is a member of the Socialist International:
Lula da Silva, Michele Bachelet, Óscar Arias, Alan García and
Daniel Ortega.
• The government party is a member of the Christian Democrat
International: Felipe Calderón.
37
• The government party is a member of the Liberal International:
Manuel Zelaya.
• The government party is a member of the ALBA Group: Hugo
Chávez, Evo Morales, Rafael Correa and Daniel Ortega.
Presidential mandate
Considering the percentage of votes obtained in the elections
becomes another way of analyzing the presidents of the Republic,
which is represented in the following chart:
Hugo Chávez and Álvaro Uribe obtained extraordinarily high
percentages in one single round. The mandate for Lula da Silva was
also very high, but in second round. Mandates not as strong are
those of Óscar Arias, Daniel Ortega, and Felipe Calderón.
Nevertheless, it is important to mention that due their countries’
electoral system characteristics, they did not have the opportunity to
compete in a second round. The others are in an intermediate situation. Alan García had a very low percentage in the first round,
obtaining a second place with 20.406% of the vote; however, he
won the second round with a much higher percentage, 52.62%.
38
Trend toward a complicated governability
One of the ways to measure governability in a political system
is to determine if governments have or not a majority in the
Parliament. During the period under study, the result is the following:
To summarize, out of the twelve countries, only four have a
majority in Parliament, while in eight of the cases, presidents do not
have a majority in Parliament. Smoother governance is experienced
by Hugo Chávez, Álvaro Uribe, and Michele Bachelet who have a
majority due to their own political forces. Correa did not run any
congressional candidates, so he does not have any parliamentary
representation. However, he called for a referendum to propose a
Constituent Assembly where he hopes to win the majority. Lula da
Silva, Oscar Arias, and Daniel Ortega have built alliances that have
allowed them to have a majority in Parliament.
Presidential re-election trend
Regarding the issue of presidential re-election, the countries
whose constitutions have contemplated a re-election are fourteen:
Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador,
El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, the Dominican Republic,
Uruguay, and Venezuela.
39
During the period under discussion –November 2005 to
December 2006–, the countries who held a presidential re-election
are six of a total of twelve elections held: Brazil, Colombia, and
Venezuela (consecutive re-election); Costa Rica, Peru, and
Nicaragua (non consecutive re-election).
Variations in electoral participation by country
• In Bolivia, the electoral participation increased from 72.06% in
2002 to 84.50% in 2005.
• In Brazil, it slightly increased from 79.53% in the second round
in 2002 to 81% in the second round in 2006.
• In Colombia, it slightly decreased from 46% in 2002 to 45.05%
in 2006.
• In Costa Rica, it decreased from 68.84% in 2002 (first round) to
65.21% in 2006.
• In Chile, it decreased from 90.63% in 2000 to 86.88% in 2006
(second round)
• In Ecuador, it increased from 71.21% in 2002 to 75.93% in 2006
(second round)
• In Haiti, the participation was 59.26% in 2006, and there are no
data available on previous elections.
• In Honduras, it decreased from 64.05% in 2001 to 55.38% in
2005.
• In Mexico, it decreased from 63.97% in 2000 to 58.29% in 2006.
• In Nicaragua, it decreased from 88.8% in 2001 to 66.84% in
2001 to 81.71% in 2006. (Valid ballots)
40
• In Venezuela, it increased from 56.31% in 2000 to 74.87% in
2006.
As a summary, the electoral participation increased in: Bolivia,
Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, and Venezuela. On the other hand, the electoral participation decreased in: Nicaragua, Colombia, Costa Rica,
Chile, Honduras, and Mexico. Of all the elections considered, the
electoral participation was the lowest in Colombia with 45.05%,
something which was not new since Colombia, El Salvador, and
Guatemala have had the lowest rates of electoral participation since
the early 90s.
The highest electoral participation rates were achieved by Chile,
Bolivia, Peru, and Brazil, with percentages higher than 80%. It is
important to point out that voting is mandatory in the four countries.
Graph 2
Variations in the electoral participation by country
(November 2005-December 2006)
41
Women as defense ministers:
An emerging trend
It is important to point out the arrival of women to the position
of Minister of Defense, a position historically filled by military
men. To this regard, the President of Chile, Michelle Bachelet, was
the first Minister of Defense in Ibero-America. Moreover, the following four civilian women are presently Ministers of Defense in
Latin America: Nilda Garré, Minister of Defense for Argentina;
Azucena Berrut, Minister of Defense for Uruguay; Vivianne Blanlot
Soza, Minister of Defense for Chile; and Lorena Escudero, Minister
of Defense for Ecuador. Escudero recently replaced the deceased
minister, Guadalupe Larriva, who died in a helicopter accident.
Elections and electoral institutionality
Reports by the international observation missions
from CAPEL
The international observation missions from the Center for
Electoral Promotion and Assistance (CAPEL) develop a report on
each election they observe since they are organized under the mandate and coordination by UNIORE and the Protocols of Tikal and
Quito. Such reports point out the advances and strengths as well as
the backlashes, difficulties, and weaknesses that might emerge in
the assessed electoral processes. We will present the most relevant
comments to said reports as follows.4
Regarding the general elections in Honduras (2005), the mission
perceived a widespread and committed participation among
Hondurans, as a sign of a clear support for democracy, as well as the
Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) for a clearly smooth process.
At the same time, some elements were pointed out, such as a
total absence of TSE personnel in the voting centers. In most cases,
there was an absence of an electoral roll in the voting precincts for
citizen information, as well as the widespread problems. In many
4
42
As indicated before, there was no report on Brazil’s elections.
voting precincts that were visited, the location of the divider did not
protect the secret ballot.
Moreover, there was an extreme sluggishness to transmit the
results. The uncertainty was prolonged for weeks thus generating
antagonist positions between majority parties and an evident damage of the TSE image.
The electoral reform was not enough to generate an apolitical
TSE. In the media, and in some statements by the justices themselves, they are still presented as representatives from certain political forces.
Regarding the general elections in Bolivia (2005), the mission
was able to confirm a normal and legitimate process with a massive
attendance to the ballot boxes and an excellent organization by the
National Electoral Court (CNE).
Nevertheless, in the voting precincts visited by the mission,
there were citizens who were not registered in the electoral roll due
to the depuration stipulated by the CNE in compliance with legal
provisions. Said problem prevented those voters from casting their
ballot, a problem that was overstated by some media. The issue of
electoral roll depuration shall be considered by the CNE in the
future.
The mission continues to express its concern for the major final
differences between the electoral polls and the final election results.
Regarding the presidential and parliamentary elections in Chile
(2005-2006), the mission observed that the first round was characterized by a civic and democratic spirit where citizens, political
actors, and the media stated their strong trust in the actions taken by
the Electoral Service, the Electoral Rating Tribunal, and the
Ministry of the Interior regarding the ballot count and the transmission of results.
The members of the mission received valuable documentation,
presentations by well-known academia, and the direct contact and
dialogue with members of the high command for the presidential
candidate campaigns.
43
During the second round, the mission confirmed its previous
observations and collected additional elements about the
democratic maturity and the civic behavior of the Chileans.
A larger presence of members in the voting precincts was
noticed partly due to the entry into force of new provisions stipulating the payment of minimum per diem expenses.
Some difficulties were faced by handicapped and elder voters to
cast their ballot while the precincts showed a balanced presence of
men and women since the female and male population cast their
ballot separately, in precincts designated by gender.
It seems that the electoral institutionalization in Chile is one of
the most efficient and professional in Latin America.
Regarding the national elections in Costa Rica (2006), the mission pointed out that it was organized, free, and clean, a truly electoral-civic activity. These elections are part of the long democratic
tradition of Costa Rica and reveal a consolidated electoral institutionalization that succeeded amidst elections that were decided by a
slight margin. The strong tension that characterized the final voting
was properly dealt with by electoral authorities.
The mission considered that the process was carefully organized
by the Electoral Tribunal, which has a significantly favorable image
in the country, and it did not find any real threats against the normal
development of the elections.
According to observers, it is worth mentioning that the process
had a minimum presence of security authorities. Moreover, it is also
worth mentioning the presence of children’s elections as a stimulus
for the political participation and an educational mechanism in
favor of democracy.
The results of the elections were quite different from the forecasts made by polling firms.
Observers believed that the initial transmission of results should
be modified to consolidate the total count of ballots received and
not give an individual reading of some precincts.
44
Table 8. Electoral observation missions supported by CAPEL (2005-06)
45
Regarding the presidential elections in Colombia (2006), the
mission observed that despite the difficulties faced by the
Colombian society –some of them practically unique in the region–
the vitality and strength of its representative democracy is unquestionable. The elections were smooth and normal, without any violent incidents and characterized by strong security measures that did
not intimidate the citizens, incidents that are considered normal
within the context of Colombia.
The process of presidential re-election, unique in the history of
Colombia, did not cause any major complications, and the elections
were well organized by electoral authorities. Some observers considered that the use of two shifts (morning and afternoon) for the
voting precincts was suitable. However, observers noticed that the
electoral participation was low.
The mission showed concern for the existence of three identity
documents to be submitted in order to cast a ballot, as well as a very
restricted use of the electoral roll. It was evident in the oldest identity documents that they were very vulnerable thus opening the door
to a possible supplantation of the voter. Moreover, the members of
the voting precincts have access only to the identity document number; they do not have a list of voter names or photos so that they can
compare if the photo really matches the voter. On the other hand,
the voter does not sign the voting list; there is not requirement for
fingerprints or photos. This makes the process highly vulnerable.
The mission respectfully urges the country to review these issues.
In the future, it is important to improve the civil registry and the
electoral census. A comprehensive analysis of the Colombian electoral system is recommended.
Regarding the elections in Peru (2006), the mission observed
that the elections were developed under normal circumstances,
characterized a civic behavior and a significant electoral participation. However, Peru also witnessed a process characterized by a climate of nervousness and polarization largely motivated by the
media. In some places, there were verbal or physical confrontations
and even the use of weapons. Intolerance outbreaks endangered the
integrity of the presidential candidate who won the first round.
46
The members of the mission did not find any situations that
might cast doubts about the legitimacy of the electoral process;
however, there were delays in the generation of important information about the results. In general, in the second round there was an
improvement regarding the safety of the candidates and speed to
transmit the results.
The photographic voting roll guarantees a safe process, and it
was successfully used. On the other hand, identify documents
caused some problems that might indicate the probability of alterations.
Regarding the elections in Mexico (2006), the mission pointed
out that there was a normal electoral process characterized by a
wide and organized participation and a significant civic maturity.
This maturity was also present in the waiting period for the results,
due to the narrow margin between the first and second positions.
The mission recognized the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) for
showing a highly experienced organization of the elections based
on suitable mechanisms and a highly technical sophistication such
as: a photographic voting roll, computers set up in special booths,
and a material kit that can be transformed into a table to place the
ballot boxes. Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that the voting
did not start according to schedule due to delays in the organization
of materials.
The mission of preliminary monitoring, sponsored by the UNDP
and supported by CAPEL, pointed out IFE achievements in this
process: the number of voting booth trained officials (900.000), the
implementation for the first time of the voting process abroad, the
respect for neutrality agreements by public servants, the penalties
for those exceeding the expense limit, the duty to disclose campaign
expenses, the monitoring system for the electoral programs and its
costs, and an evident support for national observers.
Due to the narrow margin between the first and second positions,
the recommendation for IFE is to have a more reliable computer
system (even preliminary) to avoid rumors and negative comments,
or to improve the accuracy of the certificates of results so that they
47
can be immediately transmitted. Finally, the mission pointed out the
excellent organization of the program and the tours designed for
foreign visitors. The only inconvenience was that foreigners did not
have access to all the visited booths, especially during ballot scrutiny.
Regarding the elections in Ecuador (2006), the mission pointed
out that the elections took place under normal circumstances,
except for minor isolated incidents. The civic vocation and decisive
and peaceful participation of Ecuadorians were evident. Some political actors appealed to the argument of electoral fraud that was not
verified by the mission. The members of the mission did not find
any irregularities that invalidated or delegitimized this electoral
process.
For the presidential elections in Nicaragua in November 2006,
CAPEL also participated in the observation sponsored by the
Supreme Electoral Council (CSE) from that country. Observers
pointed out that elections were held under normal and circumstances and the enthusiasm of the Nicaraguan citizens. The mission
congratulated Nicaraguans for their civic behavior. The electoral
process was also quiet, but a mutual distrust prevailed in the political forces that led to excessive controls, the duplication of formalities, and a constant verification that had an impact on election
development and made the voting process slow. Minor problems
with the ballot boxes, the places chosen to be the electoral centers,
and the voting roll do not weaken the process, but they are subject
to evaluations in the face of future elections.
The presidential elections in Venezuela on December 3, 2006,
were held under normal circumstances and with high citizen participation. It was a civic-electoral process where the National
Electoral Council (CNE) made this process a civic exercise with
minimum competitive conditions in which CAPEL mission witnessed the enthusiastic participation of the Venezuelans.
The existence of an electronic voting system developed specifically for the Venezuelan elections and the overcoming of past resistance by the opposition to participate in the electoral processes were
48
two incidents that were pointed out on this opportunity. Unlike what
happened in the revoking referendum in 2004, on this occasion the
opposition accepted the results and its defeat in the ballot boxes.
Besides these reports, CAPEL also issued technical evaluations
of the legislative elections in Colombia, El Salvador, and the
Dominican Republic, as well as the municipal elections in Peru and
Costa Rica. However, they are beyond the scope of this analysis.
Some findings about electoral processes
The observation by IIHR/CAPEL revealed the following findings resulting from the large number of electoral processes for this
fourteen-month period:
• Electoral democracy strength
Despite its short life in most Latin American countries, and
probably with the exception of Haiti, the Latin American electoral democracy reveals its strength in some electoral aspects. In
general and even though the word “fraud” is still used in politicians’ speeches (particularly in Honduras, Mexico, and
Ecuador), there has been a solid development of the necessary
systems to provide suitable conditions for freedom, equality,
transparency, authenticity, and competitiveness, at least technically speaking.
However, the “continuous improvement” of electoral systems
that has been sponsored by CAPEL for more than two decades
is worth mentioning. Both in the areas of technology and regulations, there have been advances and failed attempts that are an
important source of mutual learning: process automation, political funding controls, improvement of electoral records and electoral rolls during the elections, facilities to exercise the right to
cast a ballot, and the guarantee of a secret ballot, the scope of the
training provided to the people in charge of the voting precincts
and the representatives of political parties.
There are structures specialized in managing the elections and
the resolution of related conflicts, a typical situation in Latin
49
America and the Caribbean, by defining the sources to create a
true and independent electoral right.
It has been possible to confirm a great flexibility of observation:
all the countries5 were open to international observation –by different entities and not only by their Electoral Network supported by CAPEL– and most created the conditions for different
types of national observation systems.
Finally, the region has shown its capacity and maturity to conduct forty electoral processes in just fourteen months and as it
will be analyzed below, with a wide participation of other electoral organizations and entities specialized in the promotion of
democracy.
• A more complex electoral agenda
Beyond the overwhelming numbers, this period also reveals that
the agenda of electoral organizations has become increasingly
complex. Besides organizing elections (or the resolution of electoral conflicts), the electoral organizations are responsible for
preparing and holding direct democracy events, controlling
political funding, having an impact on the internal structures of
political parties, especially their democratization and sometimes
internal elections; regulating, applying, and disseminating the
consequences of reforms of the fundamental rules of the electoral process; and controlling electoral propaganda and media
access. As it can be understood, each new issue entrusted to electoral organizations means the development of new skills and
systems, but without neglecting the most “traditional” duties of
electoral organizations.
5
50
A possible exception is Brazil, due to its own dynamics and priorities that
today are not similar, electorally speaking, to those in the rest of Latin
America. Anyway, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal in Brazil informed CAPEL
about the elections held in October, but it did not activate the cooperation system planned by electoral associations; it was an open invitation to entities concerned with democracy issues. Due to its primary philosophy, CAPEL considers that its intervention is a priority when this implies the collaboration and
participation of electoral organizations that are members of these associations.
• The key importance of elections: Narrow results
and political complexities
This period clearly showed that, without prejudice to the different levels of actual electoral participation, elections are at the
core of national agendas, and whenever there are situations like
those in Honduras (presidential),6 Costa Rica (presidential) with
a 1% difference between the first and second positions, Mexico
(presidential) where the difference was slightly higher than ?%,
El Salvador (municipal elections in the city of El Salvador,
which was decided by fifty votes), and the determination of the
second position in the presidential elections in Peru (less than
1%); a situation of political interests motivated by a slight difference between victory and defeat and that finally subjects the
electoral institutionalization to strong pressure, has emerged.
The level of trust prevailing in the population regarding electoral
institutions, their ability to convey timely clear messages about
improvements and difficulties and the success to explain legal
possibilities and tools offered by the system to generate results
and eventually refute them, are key factors for citizens and political forces under dispute to be able to understand and accept the
final results provided by electoral authorities.
• The relationship between technical and political issues
and difficulties related to result transmission
A clear issue throughout these fourteen months is the strong relationship between technical and political issues as illustrated by
the difficulties related to the transmission of electoral results, an
issue that it is often overstated by the media, especially television. The public opinion has the rooted belief that speed means
security, thus sometimes generating false expectations about
“fast ballot count” or “preliminary results.” In Honduras, the
lack of clear and timely decisions about who should be in charge
6
Despite a 5% difference between the first and second positions in the presidential elections, it took several days to start transmitting the results; therefore,
the first estimates were not very clear as to who the winner was.
51
of gathering the results by center; in Ecuador, the controversial
engagement of a Brazilian company that was not very experienced in providing preliminary results, the persistence of chronic problems in the transfer of information related to the preliminary results in the legislative elections in Colombia, and the
archaic response by the political class in the Dominican
Republic when they challenged the flow of information about
said results, reveal that this is a topic that should be clearly
defined and that it should be provided with safe mechanisms
based on a consensus by the political forces in advance so that
there are not any negative responses or blockades precisely
while citizens are waiting for concrete data about electoral
results. One of the lessons resulting from this saturated electoral
situation is that the distrust in the electoral system was just overcome superficially by the Latin American collectivity, and that
the emergence of relative uncertainty factors and a misinformed,
biased, or alarming coverage by some media, will lead to the
invocation of the word “fraud” to delegitimize entire processes
that have been monitored by national and international observers
and that have not been previously discredited. A previous agreed
armour is essential so that these stressful situations are kept
under control.
• Electoral institution resistance even in extreme situations
A positive aspect, even under the tense situation faced by the
corresponding institutions, particularly in Mexico and Ecuador,
is the resistance and significant tension faced by them, and how
the State as a whole supported the institutionalization. In Latin
American history, a not so far past, this would have been enough
to disturb the institutional order and for the Armed Forces to deal
with the situation. While in Mexico the PRD’s refusal to ratify
the electoral results has persisted, and it was still evident even
some time after, the crisis has remained within the constitutional foundations. In Ecuador, Mexico, or Costa Rica, the experience of the intensity of post-electoral tension is bolstering the
debates about possible reforms or improvements of electoral
regimes.
52
• The basis for possible electoral reforms
The last few years witnessed the emergence of a movement that
was seeking to match modernization with information system
automation. Undoubtedly, there is room for state-of-the-art
information system technologies at different stages of the electoral process, from the development of the electoral roll to the
result processing, but the experience resulting from these fourteen months has revealed that the basis for an electoral reform in
Latin America includes many fields and not only information
systems. Two of the countries involved (Brazil and Venezuela)
had processes that chose the electronic voting system; for each
system this means a different and valuable regulatory and technological development. For example, Paraguay used an electronic voting system for a significant part of the internal elections of political parties and of the municipal elections in
November 2005, supported by Brazilian technology, but it is not
still free from the controversy and skepticism about an electronic voting system.
But the issues for a reform that will seek to improve electoral
systems in the region go beyond: how to include funding controls more effectively, how to ensure minimum equality conditions in the electoral process, how to promote changes in the life
of political parties without interfering with their autonomy are
topics for a debate about an electoral reform, as well as the structure of the electoral organization or the mechanism to designate
the relevant authorities.
This debate has been significantly enriched by the good (and not
so good) experiences in the last fourteen months and has encouraged a discussion that is already taking place in Costa Rica,
Mexico, Colombia, Chile, and Honduras.
• Significant variations in the behavior of the opposition towards
the victory of the contenders
While in Mexico the opposition did not recognize the victory of
its contenders, it organized protest manifestations against the
53
results and appointed an alternative cabinet, thus breaking the
tradition of compliance with electoral authority decisions, in
Venezuela, the opposition abandoned its stance from the last few
years and immediately recognized the victory of its contenders.
This new attitude by the opposition should be monitored to
understand how the political arena has changed and how it influences the electoral system amendments. Of course, in Mexico
we have to point out the agreement regarding the electoral institutionalization while in Venezuela, there is room for negotiations
that were previously impossible by definition. Time will tell how
these situations will be capitalized, but this period has indeed led
to significant changes in the behavior by the opposition.
• Significant amendments to the political party system and its
balance
Bolivia, Costa Rica, and Colombia have shown that the national
system of political parties can drastically change in a short time.
For the first time in a very long time, Bolivia decided the presidential election in a single round and consolidated a left party
thus making traditional parties play a minor role in the political
arena. Costa Rica has shown how a traditional bipartisan and
apparently stable system can be subdued by the strength of
emerging groups and the fall of the party in power. Colombia
portrays another traditional image of a bipartisan system, with
dominant groups both on the left and the right.
It is clear that the party system is not free from drastic transformations in Latin America, and a more solid balance is just a
probability.
• Livelihood of national or regional political crises
Bolivia is an example of a national crisis where elections did not
mean a peaceful solution. The complexity of the situation in that
country probably implies a multiple and complex negotiation
based on balanced national and regional interests, political and
economic interests, but the elections held in December 2005
(won by Evo Morales) and the designation of the constituent
assembly in July 2006 are so far new incidents that contribute to
54
internal tensions in the country. Bolivia is not either the only
case in Latin America of a country that has to deal with different
situations of internal strife, but it is the most notorious case and
the best mirror to look at.
In the last ten years, Ecuador has had eight presidents. The
penultimate presidents did not finish their constitutional term.
This country was able to operate without the Supreme Court for
a couple of months. Therefore, the Ecuadorian political situation
is worrisome due to its increasing instability and the polls, showing low support for political parties and the Judiciary, have also
shown a very low support for democracy. Ecuador does not need
sudden shocks and avatars amidst the difficult learning experience to improve the quality of democracy and institutions, as
pointed out by the Ibero-American Democratic Letter in its
objectives and in Article 27. Electoral processes in 2006 were
able to continue on the path towards a democratic institutionalization, which should be celebrated by the entire Latin American
community, particularly, by the electoral college of the
Americas, but the difficulties in Ecuador do not seem to be completely solved.
Old topics and an emerging electoral agenda
Maybe, the most significant issue in this period is the coexistence of old and new topics in the Latin American electoral agenda.
In fact, the relative seniority of the topics in the electoral agenda is not a guarantee that they will become daily life activities, at
least in today’s Latin America. The 2005-2006 period showed, once
again, the central importance of topics such as the electoral roll or
the transmission of results. It is essential to understand that these
areas are not entirely technical, but they have a critical political
dimension that has an impact on the image and the credibility of
electoral organizations, the legitimacy and acceptance of electoral
processes, and the good health and governance of democratic systems.
The same can be said of the two cornerstones of any good electoral process, whose lack would make success a product of chance:
55
the logistics, in the face of the electoral process, and the training for
the members of the voting precincts, the party representatives, and
the citizens at large, with a view to achieving their assimilation of
reforms or changes in the electoral system or the location of voters.
It does not matter how many electoral processes an electoral organization dealt with successfully, if there are planning errors in the
logistics or the design or scope of the training and transmission, the
process will be compromised.
But besides these recurring topics, which cannot be overlooked
given their impact on electoral processes over time, there are new
topics that we might classify as part of the emerging electoral agenda. We should ask ourselves, in this context, what is the scope of the
information system automation of electoral processes in different
countries? What are the elements or aspects of an improvement
agenda in this area for different countries? As pointed out above, the
electronic voting system, an area where the advances are evident in
Brazil and Venezuela, is a new dimension with its own challenges
that electoral organizations should include in their consideration of
what is accurate and what is useful in the technological advances in
electoral processes, but also for electoral national and international
observation since they add a new angle that demands specialized
technical approaches to assessing the process.
Another significant topic in the emerging electoral agenda is the
inspection of political funding, that is, both political party funds and
electoral campaign funds. With a few exceptions, there are restrictions and regulations for the use of funds for political purposes, and
this has become a new item in the list of duties of electoral organizations. The modifications from the last few years in Latin
America7 have shown that this is a current event, but different formulas are still being tested and the results are not always satisfactory, and there is enough room for an exchange.
The regulation of campaigns regarding their length and messages conveyed by the political forces, the influence of media on
7
56
Good examples are Chile between 2005 and 2006 and Argentina and
Guatemala between 2006 and early 2007.
public opinion, and the measurement of electoral preferences
through surveys and polls are topics that have become significant
items in the agenda of electoral organizations in Latin America.
The integration of electoral organizations is an item in the
debates on elections and democracy in: Colombia, Peru, Honduras,
what these countries are doing; Mexico and Ecuador, what they will
probably do in the near future. In Chile, what is being discussed is
the electoral system in the strict sense of the word; in Costa Rica
what is being discussed is a general improvement of the electoral
regime.
Finally, and as a response to the concerns with political parties
and the scarce citizen trust in political parties, there are several
degrees of interference by electoral organizations in the parties. Not
too long ago, the only case in Latin America where primary elections were under the responsibility of the electoral organization was
Uruguay, but after the reforms that governed the recent process in
Honduras, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal from that country has
wide powers to organize internal party processes. What is true is
that through the controls of the funds, like the case of Chile, or the
defense of activist rights, like the case of Costa Rica, through the
existence of minimum requirements for party internal operations to
register candidates, like the case of Peru, the chart of powers of
electoral organizations as opposed to the traditionally internal
(only) scope of political parties has increased and there is a growing trend in that direction.
The electoral network of the Americas,
electoral observation, and technical cooperation
An unprecedented electoral agenda has pointed out the strength
of democracy in the western hemisphere as well as the implications
for the operations of the electoral organizations, particularly the
actions that drive the Electoral Network of the Americas and the
role of the international electoral observation in this context.8
8
See the Report by the Executive Secretariat for the VIII Conference of the
Inter-American Union of Electoral Organizations (UNIORE), Panama City,
August 2006.
57
The busy electoral agenda has also implied an impressive movement and unprecedented historical flows of cooperation among
member organizations of the Network: with some exceptions, the
international presence and the contribution by specialists have been
constant elements in the electoral processes during these fourteen
months, even the systems that seem more consolidated like in Chile,
Costa Rica, or Panama. This is particularly true because the observation, according to CAPEL specifications, which is conducted
with the collaboration of electoral organization members, is a double-lane road: on the hand, the opportunity to learn, and on the other
hand, the opportunity to evaluate.
The observation by the Network ends up with a collective exercise to compare experiences (positive and negative) of the organizations in the process conducted by the hosts in a program generally developed together with CAPEL.
In this period, the presence of international observers from the
Electoral Networks of the Protocols of Tikal and Quito and from
UNIORE, was a relevant cooperation factor for the prevalence of
the electoral institutionalization in different countries. The observation was seen more as a technical, institutional, qualified, and particularly valuable monitoring system because it does not share the
political interests at stake in each electoral process. The background
of the observers from the electoral organizations allowed them to
make technically sound judgments that were beyond the national
perspectives.
The national observation is undergoing a strengthening process
in Latin America and the Caribbean based on their experience
exchange system and a relative “internationalization” within the
framework such as the Lima Agreement.9 CAPEL interacts with
these agencies, and the perspective of civil society organizations
can be shared with electoral organizations within the framework of
observation programs.
9
58
The Lima Agreement is a communication and exchange system by non-governmental organizations that have more experience in the promotion of democracy in Latin America.
On the other hand, the Electoral Network of the Americas,
besides being a place of encounter for electoral organizations, civil
society organizations that are actively engaged in the agenda of
democracy, study centers, and researchers interested in political and
electoral topics, is a space to promote a horizontal technical cooperation.
At CAPEL, there were projects during this period for Colombia,
Ecuador, Honduras, Chile, and more specifically the Dominican
Republic, and from now on for the preparation of elections in
September 2007 in Guatemala. In each case, technical contributions
of the experience comparison chart were made by justices, officials
or former officials from the electoral member organizations of the
Network.
In such specific cases as the implementation of new aspects of
electoral legislation, such as Honduras, Ecuador, or Chile, the technical cooperation added the evaluation of new schemes and new
systems.
But it was not only the direct actions by CAPEL: in Honduras,
Nicaragua, El Salvador, Haiti, Bolivia, and the Dominican
Republic, there was support from other electoral organizations to
implement the different stages in the electoral timetable. That is,
besides the direct promotion by its Executive Secretariat, the
Network has a life of its own which is manifested in the constant
bilateral contacts with other organizations whose experience is
known and is valued precisely thanks to the knowledge and interaction promoted by the Electoral Network.
Finally, we should not forget that, amidst the busy electoral
agenda, and in compliance with the collaboration for the design and
development of tens of observation missions, and the implementation of technical assistance projects, CAPEL, as a program from the
Inter-American Institute of Human Rights and as an Executive
Secretariat of the Protocol of Tikal and of UNIORE, continued
developing its scope such as:
59
• Research and generation of the doctrine about prevailing or new
topics, characteristic of the political and electoral life of the
Americas, with a particular emphasis during this period on the
strengthening of political parties in this part of the world.
• Education and training, with the XII Inter-American Course on
Elections and Democracy to be held in Mexico in April 2006,
and on this occasion it will be focused on “The new generation
of challenges for democracy in the Americas,” by analyzing the
changing topics and actors in the agenda for the promotion of
democracy.
• A strategic plan to strengthen political parties in Latin America.
This Plan seems to point to one of the priorities of future activities by CAPEL in the region: an emphasis on modernization
areas through a greater democratization, institutionalization, and
transparency of political parties.
As a conclusion
During the period under study, Latin America and the Caribbean
had a “marathon-like” electoral agenda with no precedents in history. This busy agenda has shown that the electoral democracy is a
significant and dynamic part of the regional political reality, an outstanding change if we look back twenty years ago. The continuous
improvement of electoral processes is evident, as well as the significant advances in the use of direct democracy mechanisms, the
intensity and extension of international and national electoral observation, as well as the multiple flows of horizontal electoral cooperation, whose natural expansion is one of the most distinctive characteristics of the Inter-American Electoral Network, composed of
associations from Central America and the Caribbean (Protocol of
Tikal), South America (Protocol of Quito), and the Inter-American
Union of Electoral Organizations (UNIORE) and that has CAPEL
as the Executive Secretariat and as a liaison, but which has a life of
its own in the reciprocity shared with the members of the Network
during elections in order to facilitate qualified observation by
60
organizations and the issuance of technical recommendations to
improve future processes.
As a summary, the impressive agenda of 40 electoral processes
within a year meant a lot of responsibilities and challenges to conclude with a great number of experiences and significant advances
in international electoral observation and the horizontal cooperation
for UNIORE and CAPEL. We should celebrate that, besides such a
lively and active democracy, the region has an Electoral Network
capable of facing challenges even with a saturated electoral agenda.
There is no parallel in the world when comparing the work of the
electoral organization associations in other geographical regions.
Latin America and the Caribbean were able to confirm that this
period witnessed the respect for electoral agendas and electoral
alternation, the strengthening of a multipartisan system, and the
civil status of the regimes and the new presidents. However, electoral participation is still decreasing as compared to the participation one or two decades ago, and the crisis of trust in political parties is still a constant element.
On the other hand, the large amount of elections has significantly changed the political chart by region, thus leaving room for a new
left movement whose future agenda can mean a change in the internal relations in the hemisphere. The shape of this change is something that only time will tell, and then transformations will take
place.
The global balance of democracy in the region is positive even
though there are pending agendas for electoral organizations, for
political parties and other national and international actors, in fact,
there are electoral reforms under discussion in a large part of the
region. There is still much to do; democracy is still far from perfection and there are still credibility and satisfaction problems among
citizens. But for now, these fourteen months of an active electoral
agenda show that in Latin America democracy is well rooted, and
the call for participation by citizens in the electoral process is the
process the region has chosen to make national decisions and to
legitimize their authorities. It also shows that electoral democracy
61
is undergoing a continuous improvement process and that the
authorities in charge of implementing such improvements understand this democracy and know how to look for elements that will
contribute to this improvement based on the knowledge and experience of the members from the Inter-American Electoral Network.
Books
Bibliography and information sources
1. IIHR-CAPEL-Diccionario Electoral-Volumes I and II. San José,
Costa Rica, July 2000.
2. IIHR -CAPEL-Urnas y desencanto político: Elecciones y
democracia en América Latina 1992-1996. San José, Costa Rica,
1998.
3. IIHR -CAPEL-La financiación de la política en Ibero América.
San José, Costa Rica, 1998.
Documents
1. IIHR – Poner al DIA la visión del Panorama de los Derechos
Humanos y la Democracia. San José, October 2005.
2. IIHR-Informe del Director Ejecutivo a la Asamblea General.
2004-2006. San José, August 2006.
3. UNIORE-Inter-American Union of Electoral OrganizationsInforme de la Secretaría Ejecutiva-VII Conference. Panama
City, August 2006.
4. IIHR-CAPEL-CAPEL en el marco de los temas y dilemas de los
procesos electorales y los partidos políticos en las Américas.
Reports by the mission
CAPEL-International Observation Missions. Resumen de conclusiones de la jornada de Evaluación.
1. Honduras, November 27, 2005.
2. Bolivia, December 18, 2005
62
3. Chile, January 15, 2006
4. Costa Rica, February 5, 2006
5. El Salvador, March 12, 2006
6. Colombia, March 12, 2006
7. Dominican Republic, May 16, 2006
8. Bolivia, July 2, 2006
9. Mexico, July 2, 2006
10.Ecuador, October 15, 2006
11.Panama, October 22, 2006
12.Nicaragua, November 5, 2006
Websites
1. Bolivia: http://www.cne.org.bo/sirenacomp/index.aspx
2. Brazil: http://www.justicaeleitoral.gov.br/
3. Canada (parliamentary):
http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/about/process/house/hfer/hfe
r.asp?Language=E&Search=Gres&genElection=39&ridProvinc
e=0&submit1=Search1
4. Chile:
http://www.servel.cl/servel/Controls/Neochannels/
Neo_CH272/Images/ResuPresi.pdf
5. Colombia: http://www.cne.gov.co/e24_e26/e26_pe_consolida
do.pdf
6. Costa Rica (mayors) http://www.tse.go.cr/muni2006_declaratoriaalcaldes.htm
7. Costa Rica (councilmen)
http://www.tse.go.cr/muni2006_declaratoriaconcejales.htm (the
information is under construction)
8. Costa Rican (presidential):
http://www.tse.go.cr/escrutinio_f2006/Presidenciales/0.htm
63
9. Ecuador (first round)
http://www.tse.gov.ec/ResultadosParciales2006/Presidente.aspx
?CodDign=1
10.Ecuador (second round)
http://www.tse.gov.ec/Resultados2006_2v/
11.United States (parliamentary)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_elections,_2006
12.Haiti:
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elecciones_presidenciales_de_Hait
%C3%AD_(2006) -www.electionguide.org/results
13.Mexico: http://prep2006.ife.org.mx/PREP2006/prep2006.html
14.Nicaragua: http://www.elecciones2006.net.ni/escrutinio/gene
ral_p.html
15.Peru (first round):
http://www.onpe.gob.pe/resultados2006/1ravuelta/onpe/presidente/rep_resumen_pre.onpe
16.Peru (second round):
http://www.onpe.gob.pe/resultados2006 www.onpe.gob.pe/elecciones2006/resultados
17.Paraguay: www.tsje.gov.py/elecciones/2006
18.Venezuela:
http://www.cne.gob.ve/noticiaDetallada.php?id=4075
Other reports
1. Latino barómetro 2006.
2. Informe de CEPAL sobre la economía latinoamericana 2006.
64

View Document - Instituto Interamericano de Derechos Humanos

Transcription

Similar documents

the PDF

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE March 23, 2016 Media Contact: Andrea

father michael pfleger - Gun Violence Prevention PAC

azcentral politics a

ANFREL: Peaceful and orderly Thai election

BC Games Zone Structure

The Duma Drubbing: - Henry Jackson Society

RDOS Electoral Area “D

Shepway District Council