51 Cuadernos De

Home , Colombian Liberal Party, Freedom Party (Ecuador), National Unity Front, Podemos (Guatemala)

SERIE CUADERNOS DE CAPEL CUADERNOS DE 51 CAPEL

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: [email protected] 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 1992- 1996 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 compet- ing 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, polariza- tions 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 2006 analytical report 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 discrimi- nation. 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 predomi- nance 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 aggra- vated 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 2006 analytical report 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 Inter- American 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 2006 analytical report

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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas 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 authoritar- ian 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 2006 analytical report

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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 dictator- ship 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 Dem- ocrats (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 2006 analytical report

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, paramil- itarism, 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 per- sonality 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 authori- tarian 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 three- party 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 2006 analytical report

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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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

2006 analytical report

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 eco- nomics to the IMF, as well as friendly with President Bush. At the

23 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 (MERCO- SUR) 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 for- ward 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 “reconcili- ation, 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 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.

24 2006 analytical report

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 environ- ment, 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 adhe- sion 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).

Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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

2006 analytical report 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 2006 analytical report

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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

Direct democracy may complement representative democracy if developed within a context of constitutional state, ideological plu- ralism 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 2006 analytical report

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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas 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 2006 analytical report 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 intro- duced 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 2006 analytical report

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.

Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 inherit- ed 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 Afro- Caribbean 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 2006 analytical report 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 center- left 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 left- wing 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 center- oriented. 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

• 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 2006 analytical report

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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 2006 analytical report

• 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 As indicated before, there was no report on Brazil’s elections.

42 2006 analytical report 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 dam- age 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 them- selves, 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 stipu- lating 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 fore- casts 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 2006 analytical report (2005-06) Electoral observation missions supported by CAPEL able 8. T

45 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 unques- tionable. 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 cli- mate 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 2006 analytical report

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 alter- ations. 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas 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 scruti- ny. 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 formali- ties, 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 2006 analytical report 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 con- duct 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 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 con- cerned with democracy issues. Due to its primary philosophy, CAPEL consid- ers that its intervention is a priority when this implies the collaboration and participation of electoral organizations that are members of these associations.

50 2006 analytical report

• 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 televi- sion. 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 chron- ic 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 over- come 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.

2006 analytical report

• 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 struc- ture 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 encour- aged 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 influ- ences 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 2006 analytical report

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 coexis- tence 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas 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 restric- tions 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 for- mulas are still being tested and the results are not always satisfac- tory, 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 Good examples are Chile between 2005 and 2006 and Argentina and Guatemala between 2006 and early 2007.

56 2006 analytical report 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 grow- ing 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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 dou- ble-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 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.

58 2006 analytical report

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 inter- action 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

• 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 out- standing 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 2006 analytical report 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 con- clude 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 perfec- tion 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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas 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.

Bibliography and information sources Books 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 Organizations- Informe 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 con- clusiones de la jornada de Evaluación. 1. Honduras, November 27, 2005. 2. Bolivia, December 18, 2005

2006 analytical report

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_declarato- riaalcaldes.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 Elections, democracy, and human rights in the Americas

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_elec- tions,_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.