Was there electoral fraud in Bolivia? Statistics that deny the OAS


A statistical analysis belies the electoral audit of the OAS in Bolivia and the supposed 'leap' in favor of Evo Morales over the end of the count. Prepared by a study center based in Washington, the report questions the actions of the Organization of American States and the existence of fraud in the Bolivian elections.

Even though that him coup against Evo Morales He left in the background the controversy over the regularity of the national elections of October 20 in Bolivia, the preliminary report that the Organization of American States (OAS) made on the elections is questioned by an American entity that ensures that there is no evidence of fraud.
Indeed, the Center for Political and Economic Research (CEPR) – a Washington-based organization whose objective is "to promote democratic debate" – analyzed in a report the work of the Group of Auditors of the Electoral Process in Bolivia, on which the OAS relied to question Morales' victory in the first round.
The CEPR report reflects the concern expressed at the outset by the OAS for what it considered a "drastic and difficult to justify change in the trend of the preliminary results known after the closing of the polls", in reference to the greater amount of props to Evo Morales accounted for after interruption of vote counting that occurred during primary scrutiny.

For CEPR "the final results of the quick count were not difficult to justify" and the gap between Morales and the second most voted candidate, Carlos Mesa, "it constantly expanded as the counting process progressed."

"(The sum of votes to Morales) was a predictable and little surprising phenomenon that should not surprise the OAS mission," says the study.

Indeed, the analysis of the American center recalls that "a general phenomenon that occurs in several countries of the world is that those areas that transmit their results with greater delay are often politically and demographically different than the previous ones."
In Bolivia, this has happened during the last 15 years in the rural and peripheral areas of the country, which "have tended to support Morales and the Movement for Socialism-Political Instrument for the Sovereignty of the Peoples (MAS- IPSP) ".
For one of the directors of CEPR, Mark Weisbrot, the OAS observers they fell into "an important falsehood of their previous reports, pretending that there was an 'unusual' leap in the voting margin of Evo Morales over the end of the quick count." Through Twitter, Weisbrot released a graph to show that "the change was gradual in fact."

"In total, these analyzes confirm that the general trends in the results of both the quick count and the official count are easily explainable and consistent with the fact that the rural areas that later transmit their minutes greatly favor the MAS-IPSP, especially in the presidential race.In addition, and contrary to the public statements of the OAS mission, an analysis of the results of the rapid count up to the percentage (83.85%) in which it was interrupted on election day, predicts a result which is extremely similar to the actual final results, "concludes the analysis.

The US organization also recalled that in Bolivia there are two types of vote counting, the preliminary one, known as Transmission of Preliminary Electoral Results (TREP), and the official counting, which is carried out in a second instance. According to Bolivian regulations, only the official count is legally binding. In that sense, the analysis states that "the counting of legally binding official votes did not stop for any significant period."
The CEPR also noted "the politicization of the electoral observation process" incurred by OAS envoys in the Bolivian case. In this regard, the report accuses the OAS having disseminated "unsubstantiated doubts" about the electoral process through press releases and in a preliminary report.

Source link



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here