This Monday, March 6, the Investigative Commission of the five electoral magistrates will hear the complainant, Víctor Guerra, general secretary of the National Union of Hope (UNE) party, who questions the electoral results records of last August’s runoff.
The judge, Irma Palencia, who presided over the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) in the last General Elections, spoke with Free Press regarding the cases in which he is pointed out, plots that he describes as “bargaining chips” and that will set a precedent that will condition professionals who want to become electoral magistrates.
Palencia assures that there has been persecution once morest the electoral authorities since 2022 by various groups that continue to promote complaints and pressure due to discontent with the results of the voting process.
After seven months of having concluded the electoral process and your period as president of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE), how do you analyze the questions regarding the electoral results?
It is extremely regrettable, it is sad for the country. Maybe right now they are not capitalizing on this disastrous experience, but in the end, this is leaving serious precedents for democracy, for the TSE.
With everything they did regarding the judicialization of democracy and the electoral process, it is as if we had taken 15 steps back. After seven months the damage is, I don’t want to say irreversible, but if it is not stopped, if everything that is happening is not stopped, it may possibly be irreversible.
What repercussions are you referring to?
They began to persecute us since 2022, since when we decided to buy biometrics at some point. What in the future and in the present it was going to avoid and guarantee is that whoever joined a new party or joined an existing one, was going to be the person they say they are.
When we began to want to take those steps towards modernity in 2022, we had three pretrial complaints from the same complainants – as of now.
There was already a malicious narrative, but it led us to think that it was like what happened in other countries.
It is not possible for the narratives to be subject to what I like or what favors me, or what suits me, because the damage is not seen beyond the electoral system and the maximum authority of that matter.
He mentions to me that the pressures are subject to what suits some; If the electoral result had been different, do you think the situation would be different?
Of course. It depends on whether it would be to the liking of certain groups, yes, but if it were different from something they did not expect, then it would be like right now or worse or a little less.
Yes, I believe that we were experiencing a different situation, I firmly believe it, because to this day there are some groups that did not accept my results, at least publicly.
On the other hand, I feel that the actions once morest us were a kind of revenge.
And the purchase of the Electoral Results Transmission System (Trep)? Which is another of the aspects that are investigated.
What the Trep tool gives are preliminary results, which are then compared with the documents. Amazon has the experience of Guatemala, of the elections, as a successful practice.
That was overshadowed by the raids, by the harassment we had. I received threats, I received motorized persecution.
The Trep is an investment, it was not an expense, because it is left until the next election, the same company in the contract promised to give us 18 months of investment.
Did those threats or pressures come from any of the deputies who elected you as an electoral magistrate?
No, they were always anonymous threats, they reached my phone, the MP had the complaints at the time, but they have already been filed.
With this possibility of using the Trep once more, do you consider that judicialization might have an impact on the 2027 electoral process?
It can affect a lot, depending on whether the institution continues to be politicized. Only if it continues to be politicized will it affect. What is being questioned regarding Trep is the purchase and its price, not its efficiency or the service it provided.
What changed from the moment you left the country to when you returned, were there guarantees?
In January we wanted to come, on January 11 we presented the memorial to present ourselves voluntarily. Some of the companions were already very close to the border, but they were alerted that the arrest warrants had already been signed. Those who passed on that information added that if we arrived in the country before the inauguration, none of the authorities were going to take possession. We were going to be the trophy.
We waited more than three weeks and they did not resolve it – the memorial -. We better show up at Court.
And do you trust the justice system?
It’s the only thing that’s left for me and my teammates, it’s the only thing that’s left for us. Wait, take another leap of faith and hope they have neutrality.
What is sad is that now they are using our case, and I don’t know if those who are coming, who are already in Congress, as a bargaining chip. That is, magistrates or judges who are interested in being -electoral- magistrates, depending on how they decide, they are chosen. It is a latent fear.
#case #bargaining #chip
