The US-based Carter Center, which was allowed to monitor Venezuela’s “election” on Sunday, found widespread irregularities and determined that it did not deserve to be called “democratic.”
|
Listen To This Story
 |
Sunday’s “election” in Venezuela, which officials in the autocratically governed country claimed led to a victory for dictatorial president Nicolás Maduro, did not meet international standards, the Carter Center announced.
“Venezuela’s 2024 presidential election did not meet international standards of electoral integrity and cannot be considered democratic,” said the pro-democracy institute, which has monitored more than 100 elections throughout the globe. “The Carter Center cannot verify or corroborate the results of the election declared by the National Electoral Council (CNE), and the electoral authority’s failure to announce disaggregated results by polling station constitutes a serious breach of electoral principles.”
Following that “election,” the Maduro regime announced that the president had “earned” a third term, which led to widespread unrest in the country.
However, pre-election and exit polls had shown that his challenger Edmundo González held a double-digit lead.
European election observers had been disinvited, but 17 experts from the Carter Center remained, with some of them spending a month in the country to observe the preparations for this “election.”
Their assessment of the adherence to democratic principle was damning.
“Venezuela’s electoral process did not meet international standards of electoral integrity at any of its stages and violated numerous provisions of its own national laws,” the organization said. “The election took place in an environment of restricted freedoms for political actors, civil society organizations, and the media. Throughout the electoral process, the CNE demonstrated a clear bias in favor of the incumbent.”
Among some of the problems the Carter Center identified were processes intended to curb new voter registrations, which resulted in a low turnout among the millions of Venezuelans who had fled their country to escape the repressive Maduro government.
“The registration of parties and candidates also did not meet international standards. Over the past few years, several opposition parties have had their registrations changed to leaders who favor the government,” the Center stated.
The candidates who were allowed to run were then treated differently.
“The campaign of the incumbent president was well funded and widely visible through rallies, posters, murals, and street campaigning,” the Carter Center noted. “The abuse of administrative resources on behalf of the incumbent — including use of government vehicles, public officials campaigning while in their official capacity, and use of social programs — was observed throughout the campaign.”
This unequal treatment of the main candidates also extended to how the media covered them and their parties.
Maduro received fawning coverage, while González was largely ignored.
In addition, the Carter Center also found that people who provided goods and services to the opposition were subject to “harassment and intimidation.”
While the Maduro regime received ample criticism in this preliminary report, the election observers praised the Venezuelan people and their desire to peacefully participate in the election.
“Despite reports of restrictions on access to many polling centers for domestic observers and opposition party witnesses; potential pressure on the voters, such as ruling party checkpoints in the vicinity of voting centers; and incidents of tension or violence reported in some localities; voting appeared to take place in a generally civil manner,” the organization noted.
While the Carter Center was unable to visit many polling places, it observed widespread participation of the Venezuelan people as polling staff and observers.
“However, their efforts were undermined by the CNE’s complete lack of transparency in announcing the results,” the organization concluded.
