In the words of Irma Elizabeth Palencia Orellana, president of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, on the Monday after the vote, the results were then “practically invariable.”
After the vote, the Vote Receiving Boards of each of the 122,293 polling stations counted each ballot and recorded the results in minutes in the presence and signature of prosecutors from the political parties -at which time, according to the law, challenges could be made- which were delivered to the data entry workers so that they could include them in the Results Entry and Transmission Centers installed in each voting center.
In parallel, a random data entry officer followed the same procedure to verify the information and include it in the Information Program for Transmission of Preliminary Results (TREP), a new portal that the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) acquired and that displays in real time the Voting trends and preliminary election results. The portal gives citizens access to the minutes.
Guatemalans went to the polls on Sunday June 25 to elect a president, vice president, municipal mayors, representatives to Congress, and representatives to the Central American Parliament.
The Electoral and Political Parties Law establishes that if no candidate for president obtains 50% of the valid votes plus one, a second electoral round must be held to elect president between the two candidates with the most votes.
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE RESULTS OF THE ELECTIONS?
The preliminary result of the vote count – which culminated in the early hours of Sunday to Monday – is pending formal officialization by the Electoral Tribunal, but it was challenged by ten of the 29 parties for alleged failures in the TREP system.
Nine of those parties requested an amparo from the Constitutional Court to stop the publication of the official results, allow a second review and compare the records against the TREP, to which the Court agreed.
The Court also ordered that, if necessary, a new vote count be carried out, something that according to constitutionalists is not established in Guatemalan law.
The Boards, which have five business days after being notified on Sunday to comply with the court’s requirements, announced that they will start on Tuesday with the review of the scrutinies of 19 Departmental Electoral Boards. Another four will be held on Wednesday and Thursday for a total of the 23 Departmental and District Boards.
The parties that challenged the election alleged defects in the scrutiny, in the data entry and in the presentation of the results, presenting records in which, as they alleged, there were cross-outs or they did not add up the results correctly or they do not appear in the system.
Among the political forces that presented the amparo and that did not reach more than 8% of the votes in the elections are those that came in third, fourth and fifth place and that were favorites in the polls, such as the Cabal party, which had as candidate former Foreign Minister Edmond Mulet; the ruling party that nominated Manuel Conde and the Valor-Unionista coalition that promoted the candidacy of Zury Ríos Sosa -daughter of the late ex-dictator Efraín Ríos Montt-.
In turn, the Valor de Ríos Sosa party also filed a complaint against the Municipal and Departmental Boards and the data entry workers -just over 400 people- for alleged fraud.
Arévalo asked the Constitutional Court to reverse its decision, but has not yet received a response.
After the Court’s decision, the TSE said that the electoral process had “modern and scientific technological and logistical tools to protect the democratic regime of the country” but that, in compliance with the ruling, it suspended the officialization of the results.
WHAT DO OBSERVERS AND INTERNATIONAL ENTITIES SAY ABOUT THE RESULTS?
Organizations that observed the electoral process and validated the process, despite isolated incidents on election day, said that the citizens expressed themselves clearly.
For their part, many citizens have made public the minutes of the tables where they cast their votes to show that there were no challenges or alterations.
Countries like the United States, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Sweden and Norway, among others, have expressed their concern about the interference of the Judiciary in the electoral process, but the Guatemalan government requested respect for the sovereignty of the country.
The Secretary General of the United Nations, António Guterres, said through his spokesman that he is following the events in Guatemala with concern.
“The secretary-general has taken note of the concerns expressed and is confident that any action taken will be in accordance with applicable electoral rules,” his spokesman Farhan Haq told a news conference on Monday.
Meanwhile, the observation mission of the Organization of American States (OAS) stated that the Court’s order to carry out an additional review and comparison of the records is not contemplated in Guatemalan law.
“Feeding a fraud narrative without supporting evidence undermines the popular will and democratic institutions. Elections must be won at the polls, not disabling candidacies or challenging legitimate results emanating from the electorate. In the democratic game, it corresponds to the winners to act with humility and to the losers with dignity”, expressed the OAS.
Given the situation, the OAS announced on Monday that it will redeploy its observers to attest to the second review.
HOW DO THE EXPERTS ANALYZE THE POST-ELECTION SITUATION?
Francisco Jiménez, professor of Political Science at the Rafael Landívar University, said that the situation is the product of a tension between a corrupt political system that clings to power and the need for change that society expressed at the polls.
“The vote that led the parties to the second round is representing what is new in Guatemalan society… The vote in favor of the candidate Arévalo was not an ideological vote, but a vote for difference and anti-corruption and a change of system political”.
Tiziano Breda, a Latin America researcher at the Affari Internazionali Institute in Italy, said the judicial maneuver is “one of the most brazen and least substantiated attempts, in recent times, to question an electoral process.”
Breda explained that the process was recognized as reliable and transparent by international organizations and that the decision of the Constitutional Court is a challenge to the international community and to society.
“The situation seems to respond to the concern of those political forces that have been excluded from the second round and from Congress that there could be some change in the country’s policy and that this breaks… with the circles of impunity and corruption that are They have been forged and installed in recent years,” he said.
The question is, he maintained, how far justice is willing to go. “It would seem surprising to me if they decided… to reverse and manipulate the results of the votes in order to exclude the Seed Movement and thereby destroy the dignity of the electoral process that entails repercussions at the international level and delegitimizes anyone who wins a second return”, concluded Breda.
FUENTE: Associated Press
