2024-09-08 06:49:59
Venezuela’s National Electoral Commission committed massive fraud, declaring false results that gave Nicolás Maduro the victory, even though his opponent Edmundo González was elected, according to audit records compiled by the opposition, which accounts for 83.5% of the country’s total. His vote count was more than twice that of Maduro.
In an attempt to lend legitimacy to the fraudulent proceedings, the CNE and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs invited hundreds of members of social movements, civil associations and parties associated with the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) to act as “observers,” “observers,” or “accompaniments.” “The national team, although they were not prepared.
According to the Declaration of Principles of International Election Observation, international election observation is “the systematic, complete and accurate collection of information on laws, procedures and institutions related to elections and other factors related to the electoral environment.” “Conduct an impartial and professional analysis of the above information and draw conclusions about the nature of the electoral process based on the most stringent standards of information accuracy and analytical impartiality.”
Dictators don’t like this
The practice of professional and critical journalism is a fundamental pillar of democracy. That’s why it bothers those who think they have the truth.
However, most participants in the Electoral Peers program organized by the Venezuelan government have not received, nor do they intend to receive, election observation training. They openly support the government and support Nicolás Maduro’s re-election.
Most of them traveled to Caracas to attend the conference “Second World Social Alternatives: People’s Organizations as a Factor of Self-Determination” organized by the Bolivarian Alliance of the Peoples of the Americas – People’s Trade Pact (ALBA). ” and held just days before the election.
Although reports from groups such as Venezuelan civil society and electoral transparency warned of irregularities in the electoral process, many of them were active on social networks before, during and after election day to ensure that the election met democratic standards.
According to the European Platform for Democratic Elections, fake election observation is “a form of political activity carried out by international actors with the aim of promoting the interests of politicians and political forces by simulating credible electoral monitoring during the electoral process”. Cover up election results. relativization of election observations.
Fake election observers who traveled to Venezuela used their influence networks to support the CNE’s massive fraud and ignored the will of the Venezuelan people. Although the electoral authorities did not provide the tallies of the more than 30,000 polling stations (which was supposed to happen within 48 hours of the election), false observers assured that the results published by the CNE were genuine and that the minutes compiled by the opposition were wrong of.
Spain. One example is the statement issued by nearly 50 Spanish “observers” who traveled to Venezuela, many of them from parties such as Soumare, Podemos and EH Bildu, in which they approved “support for the legitimacy, transparency and integrity of the Venezuelan electoral process” 83% of minutes Edmundo Gonzalez clearly won.
Another example is the Commission of Latin American Electoral Experts (Ceela), an organization founded in 2004 with state funding in Venezuela to support its elections. This is not the case with activists of movements and parties associated with Chavismo, who together with Serra sought to give a technical appearance to false electoral observations. The group is backed by former electoral authorities from countries in the region and is led by Nicanor Moscoso, president of Ecuador’s disputed electoral tribunal.
For example, Serra historically has a report supporting the 2017 Venezuelan National Constituent Assembly elections, which concluded that “the electoral process was designed to elect members of the Venezuelan National Constituent Assembly in 2017.” National legislation, implementation is satisfactory”; although companies that provide technology for automated voting systems have accused the election results of being rigged.
This time, Ceela also performed the function of legitimizing irregular or fraudulent elections. For example, instead of asking the CNE to release the minutes of the meeting announcing the results, as the Carter Center did, Nicanor Moscoso said the opposition must prove fraud.
Eugenio Chicas, another member of Ceela and former presiding judge of El Salvador’s Supreme Electoral Tribunal, believes that “the opposition is a little bold because in fact they did not get a bad vote, in 80 % of the votes counted, they still had more votes.” Over 4.4 million votes, or 44%, is actually a pretty good vote considering the candidates are as bad as their candidates and the opposition is divided on the ballot.
This statement of political analysis of, and even disqualification of, opposition candidates clearly demonstrates that they are not impartial observers but political agents seeking to legitimize fraudulent results under the guise of election observation.
The actions of false observers prolonged the conflict, resulted in at least 24 murders and the detention of more than 1,000 people (more than 100 of them minors), and deprived the country of the possibility of a transition to democracy.
* Elect Transparency Executive Director.
1725779340
#Fake #observers #legitimize #Venezuela #fraud
2018 Venezuela election
Table of Contents
Venezuela’s Electoral Crisis: Fake Observers and Fraudulent Elections
The recent presidential election in Venezuela has been marred by allegations of massive fraud, with the National Electoral Commission (CNE) declaring Nicolás Maduro the winner despite opposition claims of irregularities. The election process has been criticized for its lack of transparency and credibility, with many international observers questioning the legitimacy of the results.
Fraudulent Election Observers
One of the key issues surrounding the election is the presence of fake election observers. The Venezuelan government invited hundreds of members of social movements, civil associations, and parties associated with the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) to act as “observers” or “accompaniments” during the election process. However, most of these individuals did not receive election observation training and openly supported the government and Maduro’s re-election [[3]].
These fake observers used their influence networks to support the CNE’s massive fraud and ignored the will of the Venezuelan people. Despite the electoral authorities not providing the tallies of the more than 30,000 polling stations, these observers assured that the results published by the CNE were genuine and that the minutes compiled by the opposition were wrong [[3]].
International Election Observation
According to the Declaration of Principles of International Election Observation, international election observation is “the systematic, complete and accurate collection of information on laws, procedures and institutions related to elections and other factors related to the electoral environment” [[3]]. International election observers are expected to conduct an impartial and professional analysis of the electoral process, drawing conclusions based on the most stringent standards of information accuracy and analytical impartiality.
However, in the case of Venezuela’s election, many international observers, including those from Spain and the Commission of Latin American Electoral Experts (Ceela), have been accused of promoting the interests of politicians and political forces by simulating credible electoral monitoring [[3]]. These fake observers have been criticized for relativizing election observations and covering up election results.
Ceela and its Role in Legitimizing Fraudulent Elections
Ceela, an organization founded in 2004 with state funding in Venezuela, has been accused of legitimizing irregular or fraudulent elections. Ceela historically has a report supporting the 2017 Venezuelan National Constituent Assembly elections, which concluded that the electoral process was designed to elect members of the Venezuelan National Constituent Assembly in 2017, despite companies that provide technology for automated voting systems accusing the election results of being rigged [[3]].
In the recent election, Ceela performed the function of legitimizing the fraudulent election, with its leader Nicanor Moscoso saying that the opposition must prove fraud instead of asking the CNE to release the minutes of the meeting announcing the results [[3]]. Another member of Ceela, Eugenio Chicas, has been criticized for downplaying the opposition’s performance, saying that they did not get a bad vote and that 44% is actually a pretty good vote considering the candidates are as bad as their candidates and the opposition is divided on the issue [[2]].
Consequences of Fraudulent Elections
The consequences of fraudulent elections are far-reaching and can have a significant impact on the democratic process. Fraudulent elections can lead to a loss of trust in institutions, erosion of democracy, and even social unrest. In the case of Venezuela, the election crisis has led to widespread protests and calls for international intervention [[1]]
the recent presidential election in Venezuela has been marred by allegations of massive fraud, with fake election observers and fraudulent election results. The international community must take a stand against fraudulent elections and promote transparency, accountability, and democratic principles.
References:
[1] BBC News, “Venezuelan court upholds Maduro’s disputed victory”
[2] Verfassungsblog, “Unprecedented Fraud and New Momentum”
<a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/longform/2024/9/4/how-venezuelas-recent-history-can-inform-its-present
Venezuela Election Fraud: A Comprehensive Analysis
The recent presidential election in Venezuela has been marred by allegations of massive fraud, with opposition candidate Edmundo González claiming that he was the rightful winner, despite President Nicolás Maduro being declared the victor. The election has been marked by controversy, with reports of electoral fraud and escalating police violence [1].
According to audit records compiled by the opposition, González won with 83.5% of the country’s total vote count, more than twice that of Maduro [3]. However, the National Electoral Commission (CNE) has declared Maduro the winner, sparking widespread protests and international condemnation.
Electoral Fraud and Irregularities
The Venezuelan government has been accused of committing massive fraud to ensure Maduro’s victory. The CNE and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs invited hundreds of members of social movements, civil associations, and parties associated with the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) to act as “observers,” “observers,” or “accompaniments” to lend legitimacy to the fraudulent proceedings. However, most of these participants have not received election observation training and openly support the government and Maduro’s re-election.
The Declaration of Principles of International Election Observation states that international election observation is “the systematic, complete and accurate collection of information on laws, procedures and institutions related to elections and other factors related to the electoral environment” [2]. However, many of the “observers” invited by the Venezuelan government have failed to meet these standards, instead using their influence networks to support the CNE’s massive fraud and ignoring the will of the Venezuelan people.
Fake Election Observers
The practice of fake election observation has been condemned by international organizations such as the European Platform for Democratic Elections. Fake election observers traveled to Venezuela to support the CNE’s massive fraud and ignored the will of the Venezuelan people. They used their influence networks to legitimize the fraudulent election results and ignored reports of irregularities in the electoral process.
One example of fake election observers is the statement issued by nearly 50 Spanish “observers” who traveled to Venezuela, many of them from parties such as Soumare, Podemos, and EH Bildu. They approved “support for the legitimacy, transparency, and integrity of the Venezuelan electoral process” despite the opposition’s claims of electoral fraud [3].
Another example is the Commission of Latin American Electoral Experts (Ceela), an organization founded in 2004 with state funding in Venezuela to support its elections. Ceela has been accused of legitimizing irregular or fraudulent elections, and its president, Nicanor Moscoso, has been criticized for his role in supporting Maduro’s re-election.
International Condemnation
The international community has condemned the Venezuelan government’s actions, with many countries refusing to recognize Maduro’s re-election. The European Union, the United States, and other countries have imposed sanctions on Venezuela in response to the electoral fraud and human rights abuses.
Conclusion
The Venezuelan election has been marred by allegations of massive fraud, with opposition candidate Edmundo González claiming that he was the rightful winner. The CNE’s declaration of Maduro’s victory has sparked widespread protests and international condemnation. The use of fake election observers to legitimize the fraudulent election results has been condemned by international organizations, and the Venezuelan government’s actions have been criticized as a violation of democratic principles.
