December 15, 2006
Election observers submit first reports on Venezuelan presidential election

(Venezuelanalysis.com) - "The Electoral Observer Mission of the Organization of American States (OAS) submitted its first preliminary report on Wednesday, which certified that the December 3rd presidential election occurred within a framework of 'general normality' and transparency. Other observer reports that have already been submitted with similar results were those of the European Union and the Venezuelan NGO Ojo Electoral (Electoral Eye).

President Hugo Chávez won reelection to Venezuela's presidency, for a second full six-year term on December 3rd with 62.9% of the vote, to the 36.9% obtained by opposition candidate Manuel Rosales. Rosales conceded defeat to Chávez on election night, surprising many observers who had expected him to claim fraud had been committed.

The OAS had stationed 60 electoral observers throughout the country, while Ojo Electoral had 337 observers, and the EU had stationed 154 observers. The other main electoral observer group was from the Carter Center, which sent only a small technical commission to observer the vote counting process. It has not yet released a report on its findings.

All three reports highlighted the high turnout of 75%, which OAS electoral mission Chief Juan Fischer called, 'a high percentage of citizen participation, considering that in Venezuela the vote is not mandatory.'

Similarly, the Ojo Electoral report, which was released the day after the elections, stated, 'The abstention rate that was registered was the lowest in recent history. There was massive voting and the election day proceeded with normalcy and efficiency, with few incidents.'

The preliminary European Union report, which was released two days after the election, said, 'The high turnout in the Presidential Elections, and the peaceful environment in which they were held, together with the candidates' acceptance of results, open the way forward to improvements in the confidence that the general public has in the electoral processes.'

Fingerprint scanners

Each of the reports did highlight the slightly problematic role of the fingerprint scanners in the elections process. Fischer, of the OAS, said that the scanners, which are designed to prevent voters from voting more than once, need to be explained to the public better, 'to allay suspicions and fears that the identity of the voter could be made known.' On this point, Fischer noted that the auditors of the process determined that 'this system is not capable of associating the voter with his or her vote,' which eliminates the possibility of compromising the secrecy of the ballot.

The preliminary EU report raised similar issues, stating, 'The use of fingerprint readers (captahuellas) neither violates the secrecy of the vote, nor is a source of fraud. On the other hand, they are not directly relevant in the exercise of the right to vote; furthermore, they are not nor trusted by a significant part of the electorate, and in certain cases, they led to unnecessary queuing during Election Day'. (...)

Electronic voting

With regard to the security and transparency of the voting process itself, all three groups, OAS, EU, and Ojo Electoral ratified the transparency of the voting technology that was used.

According to the OAS report, it was particularly valuable that international observers and witnesses from various candidates participated in the counting process, so that 'Their presence contributed the process more transparent and allowed to provide more confidence in the development of the electoral act.'

The EU report was even more direct, stating, 'The electronic voting system established in Venezuela is efficient, secure, and auditable, and the competence of its technical experts is consistent with its advanced technological level.'

A few days prior to the vote José Virtuoso of Ojo Electoral had encouraged all citizens to vote because, 'The conditions for the secret of the vote have been set up and I believe that we can vote tranquilly knowing that the vote is secret and that the popular will cannot be altered', he said".