Democracy continues to erode in Nicaragua
On November 9th, 2008, Nicaraguans went to the polls to elect mayors for 146 municipalities. Two weeks later, as this newsletter goes to print, the final results of the elections were still unknown, and the preliminary results have been strongly contested by the Constitutional Liberal Party (PLC). According to the Supreme Electoral Council (CSE), the state agency in charge of organizing elections nationwide, the Sandinista Front for National Liberation (FSLN) won 98 municipalities, the PLC 44, and other parties held the remaining 4. In Managua, the CSE has provisionally declared that the candidate of the FSLN, Alexis Argüello, won with 223,389 votes, or 51.32%, and Eduardo Montealegre, of the PLC, had only 202,752 votes, or 46.58%.
Is it reasonable to believe that fraud was committed?
People sort through ballots that were presumably cast on November 9th, and then thrown in the local dump uncounted. Photo by Eddie Lopez of La Prensa.
The biggest concerns and the best-documented allegations of fraud are from Managua. However, since the CSE has lost credibility for many Nicaraguans, it has proven difficult for many people around the country to accept that the elections in their own municipalities were clean, even though it is fair to assume that most of them were. It seems that fraud in Managua was committed between counting the votes and transmitting the data to the CSE’s headquarters.
The few, and less than impartial, international observers that were allowed to watch the elections didn’t have the technical capacity to make an observation of the fairness of counting process, since they only had a few observers on the ground. As a result, the observers’ comments were only based on logistics — for example, if the secrecy of the vote was observed, if coercion was not an issue, and if public and obvious situations of fraud could be observed. As the Nicaragua Network has reported, the observers have said that “the logistics were well designed and well administered (…) We didn’t find any areas where the secrecy of the vote of citizens was vulnerable and this is an extremely important principal in electoral processes, nor did we find any element of coercion of the voters (…). We have not found any incident, in the places where we observed, that could constitute fraud and we agree that if any political party has an allegation of fraud, it has the obligation to prove it before the appropriate authorities.”
However, Eduardo Montealegre, the PLC’s candidate in Managua, and independent media have presented very strong arguments to support their allegations that fraud was committed during the municipal elections. The CSE based its preliminary results on 70% of the electoral records. Surprisingly, the remaining 30% has not yet been made public. Legally, the CSE is only obligated to publish final results a month after the election. Representatives from Montealegre’s party in each precinct were able to scan the results of 92% of the electoral records, where the votes are tabulated in each precinct. That data shows that the FSLN had only 190,347 votes (or 46.53%) and the PLC 210,306 (or 52.49%). However, 8% of the electoral records are not accounted for, but even if the FSLN had won all those votes, it would not be enough to win the election. Eduardo Montealegre has posted those electoral records on a website, making his case stronger, given the strong documentation he obtained, it makes it difficult to reject (www.voto2008.org).
Results from previous elections in Managua help us to put the numbers presented by the CSE in context. In 2000, FSLN candidate Herty Lewites won with 135,000 votes. Four years later, in 2004, FSLN candidate Dionisio Marenco won with 145,000 votes. During the Presidential elections in 2006, Daniel Ortega had 162,000 votes in Managua. This calls into question the idea that that only two years later, the FSLN candidate would win 223,389 votes, an increase of over sixty thousand votes.
On November 16, 2008, Carlos Fernando Chamorro, the most prestigious independent journalist in Nicaragua, presented an excellent report on the municipal elections for his television program “Esta Semana” (“This Week”). On his program, Chamorro documented, step by step, how the fraud in Managua had taken place. The images and testimonies speak for themselves. The program can be watched at www.estasemana.tv.
The bumpy road to the November elections
Some ballots were burned, presumably to destroy the evidence. Photo by Eddie Lopez of La Prensa.
These municipal elections were particularly important as they were considered as a kind of referendum regarding President Daniel Ortega’s performance during his nearly two years in power. However, the elections turned out to be a major test of Ortega’s commitment to democracy. It is clear that he failed this test. In fact, the road to the municipal elections was full of danger signs that showed a gradual erosion of all the democratic gains since the end of the Somoza dictatorship.
The first attack against the democratic structure was the arbitrary cancellation of the legal status of two small but important political parties, the Sandinista Renovations Movement (MRS) and the Conservative Party (PC). As a result, neither the MRS nor the PC were able to participate in the municipal elections this year. Unfortunately, this is not the first time that this kind of arbitrary decision has been made in modern Nicaragua. In fact, there is a precedent in the municipal elections from 2000 when then-President Arnoldo Alemán, with the silent complicity of the FSLN, didn’t allow Yatama, the party of the Miskito Indians to participate in the municipal elections in the Atlantic Coast. The case was taken by human rights groups before the Inter-American Court, a judicial body of the Inter-American Human Rights System. The Court found the Nicaraguan State guilty of not allowing Yatama to participate in the elections, and called for a reform of the electoral law to prevent this from happening again. However, none of the traditional parties were interested in implementing the recommended changes.
In another disturbing set of events showing how political spaces have been closed by the current Sandinista government, we witnessed how the women’s movement and independent NGOs were victims of attacks by state agencies used for political purposes. Two organizations were especially targeted: the Autonomous Women’s Movement (MAM), an umbrella organization of several feminist organizations, and the Center for Research on Communication (CINCO), headed by Carlos Fernando Chamorro, (son of former Nicaraguan President Violeta Barrios de Chamorro), and Sofia Montenegro, a well-known feminist. Officials from the Attorney General’s Office raided the offices of MAM and CINCO and took their computers and other documents.
Political violence is back on the street
Discarded ballots that were marked for PLC candidates. In addition to ballots, identification cards also turned up in the dump. Photo by Eddie Lopez of La Prensa.
One of the most serious consequences of the deterioration of the political situation in Nicaragua is the return of violent street clashes between followers of the two main parties, and attacks against media, at a level that has not been seen in almost 15 years. Before and after the election, groups (most of them linked to the FSLN) have not allowed political demonstrations of opposition forces in cities such as León, the second largest city in Nicaragua, which was long considered a Sandinista stronghold, and is currently one of the cities in dispute regarding the municipal elections. The same has happened in Managua.
The police have been put in a very difficult position, given their Sandinista past. At the same time, the force has made huge progress towards becoming an independent and professional body. The same could be said about the army. If the situation gets out of hand, it is possible that at some point the army will be forced to intervene to help the police keep order.
Can this mess be resolved?
Many on both the right and the left have reacted as if time has not passed and as if they have not learned from previous mistakes. Advocates of international sanctions have called on the Bush Administration to send a strong message to the Ortega government. For instance, on November 16th, 2008, the Washington Post argued for cutting off the Millennium Account Program in Nicaragua, which administers $175 million in programs funded by the U.S. government through the Millennium Account Corporation. We know from experience that economic sanctions hurt the lives of those of lower economic status, so we are strongly opposed to that kind of action.
However, for some groups from the left in the U.S. and in Latin America, the official version of what happened on November 9th has been taken as the absolute truth. They say the opposition are agents of imperialism. For some of them, it is enough that only two new international groups backed the results, without taking into account that several other national and international groups were not allowed to be observers, with no legal grounds. This is especially disturbing, considering that election observation in Nicaragua was something that the left at national and international levels has pushed since the 1980s.
It is difficult to foresee a prompt solution to the current crisis. The fact that the US is close to a transition in government has resulted in a very low profile of Nicaraguan events in the US media. Most importantly, it seems that there are currently no institutions, nationally or internationally, that could position themselves as mediators or facilitators of a solution between the parties. For instance, although the Catholic Church in Nicaragua is today less involved in politics and is more independent, the reality is that it has aligned with the right for decades, so it is not in a position to appear neutral in the eyes of many Nicaraguans. The Nicaraguan Army is an independent institution, but it has a Sandinista past and many Nicaraguans will not trust its neutral stance either. The Organization of American States (OAS), a hemispheric body created to play such a role, is in the middle of a crisis of legitimacy, as a result of being used for decades to legitimize impositions made by the United States government throughout the region.
In short, it seems that a solution is in the hands of Nicaraguans and their institutions, as it always should be. I only hope Nicaraguans will stand up peacefully to defend their democracy.