Executive summary

Electoral Observation

Peru

1995

Secretary General César Gaviria

Assistant Secretary General

Christopher R. Thomas Executive Coordinator, Unit for the Promotion of Democracy

Elizabeth M. Spehar

This publication is part of a series of publications of the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States (OAS). Opinions and statements expressed are not necessarily those of the OAS or its

member states, and are entirely the responsibility of the parties expressing them.

Executive Summary

Electoral Observation

Peru 1995

Unit for the Promotion of Democracy

This report was produced under the technical supervision of Mr. Santiago Murray, Senior Specialist

of the Unit for the Promotion of Democracy (UPD) and General Coordinator of the Electoral Observation Mission to Peru.

Design and composition of this publication was done by the Information and Dialogue Section of the UPD, headed by Mr. John Murray. Betty Robinson and Judith Horvath-Rouco helped with the editorial review of this report, Jamel Espinoza with its production.

Copyright @ 1997. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this material is authorized; please credit it as “a publication of the General Secretariat of the Organization of American States”.

Table of Contents

Preface .......................................................................................................................................... vii Introduction .................................................................................................................................... xi PART I

Legal framework ...............................................................................................................................1 PART II Emergency zones ..............................................................................................................................5 PART III Observation of the electoral process ................................................................................................11 PART IV Presence of the OAS Secretary General in Peru ...............................................................................21 PART V and VI Election results and Final observations .............................................................................................25

Preface

Democratic ideals and principles have always been present in the Inter-American System. In 1948, the Charter of Bogota proclaimed that "the solidarity of the American States and the high aims which are sought through it, require the political organization of those states on the basis of the effective exercise of representative democracy."

Forty years later, with the entrance into force of the Protocol of Cartagena de Indias in 1988, the members of the Organization of American States (OAS) decided to include among the essential objectives of the Organization, the promotion and consolidation of representative democracy, with due respect for the principle of non-intervention. This established a political and legal framework through which the member states demonstrated a renewed and strengthened commitment to the defense and collective promotion of democracy, as well as to the key role to be played by the OAS.

The next year in Washington, D.C., the General Assembly recommended to the Secretary General that he organize and send electoral observation missions to the member states that requested them. This was followed in 1990 with the request from the General Assembly in Asuncion to the Secretary General for the creation of the Unit for the Promotion of Democracy (UPD).

In 1991, in Santiago de Chile, the General Assembly adopted Resolution 1080 on "Representative Democracy." This measure instructed the Secretary General, in the event of a sudden or irregular interruption of the democratic process in any member state, to immediately request a meeting of the Permanent Council in order to assess the situation and take appropriate measures.

Finally, in December of 1992, an extraordinary meeting of the General Assembly approved the Protocol of Washington in which the Charter of the OAS was amended to include a provision authorizing the suspension by a two-thirds majority of the right of a member state, whose government had been overthrown by force, to participate in the governing bodies of the OAS. The Protocol is pending ratification by a two thirds majority of member states.

On this wave of democratic momentum, the Unit for the Promotion of Democracy (UPD) of the OAS emerged as a key long-term mechanism for democratic development and consolidation within the Americas. Established on October 15, 1990 by Secretary General João Clemente Baena Soares, in conformity with the mandate of the 1990 General Assembly, the UPD provides "a program of support for democratic development which can respond promptly and effectively to member states, which in the full exercise of their sovereignty request advice or assistance to preserve or strengthen their political institutions and democratic procedures."

x Preface

With this foundation, and only when requested by member states, the UPD undertakes projects in the areas of democratic education, and the strengthening of electoral and legislative institutions. An additional key function is to organize electoral observation missions in those countries that request them.

Recent OAS electoral observation activities stem from the conviction that an effective and transparent electoral process is a fundamental element in both the achievement and consolidation of representative democracy. They are always organized under the guidance of the Secretary General, however, and in response to a request from a member state.

Based on this framework, electoral observation missions have the following objectives: a) to observe the electoral process and report to the Secretary General using the constitution and electoral norms of the country as a point of reference; b) to cooperate with government, electoral and party officials, and with the general public in order to assure the integrity, impartiality and reliability of the electoral process; c) to serve as an informal conduit for consensus-building and conflict resolution among the participants in this process; and d) to encourage respect for established laws and procedures, and promote the use of existing mechanisms of the electoral system in the search for solutions to problems that may arise throughout the electoral process.

Some missions, such as the one carried out in Costa Rica in 1990, or in Colombia in 1994, are short term and more symbolic in nature. These are composed of small and specialized group of observers that usually remain in the host country for a brief duration, commencing shortly before, and ending shortly after, election day. Other cases of electoral observation - such as those presented in this publication - entail missions arriving weeks, sometimes months, ahead of election day, allowing them to be present for the entire electoral process. Such missions are therefore long-term and far more complex endeavors. These more involved operations generally begin with the study of the electoral norms that underpin the entire process. The OAS then proceeds to observe the voter registration process, survey electoral organization and preparation, and monitor development during the campaign period. Other activities center around the observance of media accessibility, freedom of the press, freedom of speech and of association, the proper use of state resources, the designation and training of election officials, the production and distribution of electoral rolls and materials, and the implementation of security measures. In addition, these missions provide a comprehensive evaluation of voting and vote tabulation procedures at the individual voting precincts, including the dispatch and receipt of results, the compilation of electoral information, election verification, and any other post-electoral developments. Such long-term electoral observations usually conclude when the central electoral authority announces the final electoral results.

Electoral observation missions undertake a series of specific activities in order to fulfill these functions. These include meetings with candidates, political party representatives, electoral authorities, civic organizations and other relevant groups. The OAS also attends political meetings and rallies, monitors the media, receives and transmits to the proper authorities complaints about electoral rule violations, and carries out statistical projections (quick counts) on election day.

In other words, electoral observation missions focus on those aspects or mechanisms of the electoral and political process that could potentially create conflicts among the various parties or affect the

Preface xi integrity or transparency of the results. The above activities and analyses, therefore, combined with electoral experience acquired by the OAS and other international organizations, enable missions to target weaknesses and formulate possible approaches and solutions.

Finally, it is important to mention that OAS missions of electoral observation are carried out by multi-disciplinary teams of international civil observers - experts in electoral systems, law, political science, education, information sciences, statistics, communications, logistics and other disciplines. Often under a sensitive political climate, observers are placed throughout the host country in an effort to cover the electoral process in as many urban and rural districts as possible. In addition, advanced and independent communications, computer and transportation systems permit the OAS to keep track of voting trends and maintain constant contact among observers.

The purpose of the current publication is to provide the general public, as well as more specialized readers, with related material on some of the electoral observation missions carried out by the UPD. We hope that the study and analysis of these experiences will contribute to a better understanding of the countries of the region, and to the body of knowledge on democratic values and practices, as we approach the twenty-first century. Elizabeth M. Spehar Executive Coordinator Unit for the Promotion of Democracy

Introduction Origin and background of the Election Observation Mission

The OAS Election Observation Mission participated in the 1995 Peruvian elections in response o an invitation that the Peruvian Government extended to Secretary General César Gaviria in a note from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, dated November 18, 1994, indicating that the elections were scheduled for April 9, 1995.

Pursuant to General Assembly resolution AG/RES. 991 (XX-O/89), which recommends to the Secretary General that "when a member state so requests in the exercise of its sovereignty, missions should be organized and sent," the Secretary General informed the Chairman of the Council of Ministers and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Peru, Dr. Efraín Goldenberg, in a note dated December 29, 1994, that the OAS was had accepting the invitation. Establishment and description of the Mission a. Installation of the Mission

The General Coordinator and an initial group of observers reached Peru on February 7, 1995, and officially opened the Mission. The other observers arrived gradually, until by April 1 there were a total of 70. On election day itself, 46 volunteers from international non-governmental organizations working in Peru in connection with the elections, joined the Mission.

On April 7 the OAS Secretary General and his official party joined the group.

b. Objectives, functions, and organization of the Mission

The main objective of the Mission was to observe the organization and administration of the elections during their various stages and report on them to the OAS Secretary General, using as a references the OAS Charter; the Constitution of Peru; the Organic Election Law, Single Integrated Text; and the agreements signed by the OAS General Secretariat with the Government and with the electoral agencies. A related objective was to cooperate with government, election, and party officials and with the general public in their efforts to ensure the integrity, transparency, and credibility of the election process.

This was the framework for observing the conduct of all the participants in the elections and

the procedures used, to see whether they conformed to the electoral regulations.

xiv Introduction

c. Logistical organization

To carry out its assignment the Mission established eight subheadquarters each headed by a coordinator who worked closely with the general coordinator, from which an average of eight observers fanned out into the surrounding provinces and districts. In this way, it was able to cover almost the entire country.

The distribution of the Mission was based on three criteria: (1) the design of the statistical

sample that was to be covered in its totality for a "quick count" ("Peru Sample"); (2) the emergency zones designated by the President by agreement with the Council of Ministers, as provided for in Article 137 of the Constitution; and (3) the experience acquired during past observation missions.

The subheadquarters chosen in accordance with these criteria, were the following:

• Chiclayo, covering the departments of Tumbes, Piura, La Libertad and Lambayeque

• Cajamarca, covering the departments of Cajamarca, San Martín, Amazonas and Loreto

• Huaraz, covering the Department of Ancash

• Huancayo, covering the departments of Huánuco, Pasco, Ucayali, Junín and Huancavelica

• Ayacucho, covering the departments of Ayacucho and Apurímac

• Cuzco, covering the departments of Cuzco and Madre de Dios

• Puno, covering the departments of Puno, Moquegua and Tacna

• Lima, covering the departments of Lima and Ica and the Constitutional Province of Callao.

Each of the subheadquarters had an office, vehicles, and logistical support. An efficient

communications system connected them with the main headquarters system and also made it possible to receive all transmissions from the Peru Sample within 50 minutes.

PART I Legal framework

The legal framework for the 1995 general elections is the 1993 Constitution and the Organic Election Law Single Integrated Text. Election system

The election system is governed by Chapter XIII of the Constitution and the Preliminary Title and chapters I and II of the Organic Election Law. Its purpose is to ensure that voting is truly the voice of the people, spoken freely and spontaneously, and that the tally is a prompt and accurate reflection of the will of the voters expressed at the ballot box through direct suffrage. Election authority

The National Election Board is autonomous and is the highest authority in matters concerned with elections, referenda, and any other form of public consultation. Its decisions are final and not subject to court review.

The National Election Board decides on the application of the laws during elections, on the basis of the Constitution, and is in charge of the entire election process: the exercise of the right to vote, the validity or invalidity of elections, the announcement of the winners, the issuance of credentials, the electoral procedures, and all other matters stipulated by law. Convocation of elections

The general elections of April 9, 1994, for President, Vice Presidents, and representatives to Congress, were convoked by Supreme Decree No. 61-94-PCM (PCM is the Spanish-language acronym for the Office of the Chairman of the Council of Ministers). For the purpose of presidential, vice presidential, and congressional elections, the territory of the republic constitutes a single nationwide district. President of the Republic

The President is the chief of state and personifies the nation. He is directly elected by more than half the vote. Spoiled or blank ballots are not tabulated. If no candidate wins an absolute majority, a runoff between the two highest-ranking candidates is held within 30 days after the announcement of the official count.

4 Legal framework

The presidential term of office is five years. A President may be re-elected immediately to another

term. After at least one intervening term, the former president may run again, subject to the same conditions. National Congress

The legislative power rests with the Congress, a unicameral body with 120 members.

Representatives to Congress are elected for a five-year term by proportional representation, with an optional preferential vote.

The 1995 general elections were administered by 47 integrated provincial election boards, each chaired by the provincial attorney general and composed of four members appointed by lot from among the most educated voters. In every political district there were as many polling stations as there were electoral registers. There was at least one in every district, even where the district had fewer than 200 registered voters. Immediate re-election

Under Article 112 of the 1993 Constitution, a sitting President may be immediately re-elected to another term. This particular aspect of the election process stirred up controversy as to whether all the candidates were running on an equal footing. The argument prompted the National Election Board to exercise its legislative authority in election-related matters by introducing a bill in Congress to regulate the conduct of a sitting President who stands for re-election. The bill, enacted as Law No. 26430, sets a number of limitations on candidate-presidents, effective 90 days prior to election day. Under this law, a candidate-president may not make campaign speeches when inaugurating and inspecting public works, may not use State resources unless those resources are reimbursed and may make no reference, either direct or indirect, to the other candidates or political movements in his or her public speeches and presentations. Failure to comply with these rules of conduct leads to two types of sanctions: reprimand and, in the case of a repeated offense, a fine.

PART II Emergency zones

In late 1982, during the administration of Fernando Belaúnde, the armed forces were ordered to intervene to repress the subversive organization known as the Shining Path.

Under Law No.24150, enacted in June 1985 during the administration of Alan García, a state of emergency places the areas in question under the control of the Military Political Commands (CPM). This law formally authorizes the CPM to intervene in local politics. Military power in declared emergency zones, therefore, is not circumscribed by political boundaries. The CPM are empowered to coordinate and supervise people and institutions in the public and private sectors and may seek the dismissal, replacement, transfer or appointment of public officials within their jurisdiction, including the local officials of the National Election Board.

Legislative Decree No. 749, of November 12, 1991, broadened the authority of the CPM, explicitly putting them in charge of “development measures in areas within their jurisdiction” subordinating to them “the political authorities and the authorities of public agencies and of regional and local governments.”

One particular kind of civilian organization placed under military control is the self-defense groups: farmers' brigades, native and settler brigades, urban brigades, civil defense committees, security groups, and others.

The original farmers' brigades were formed to stop theft and corruption by crooked authorities, and received legal recognition during the Aprista government in March 1988. When the Shining Path began its incursions into farm communities, killing military authorities and members of the civil defense brigades, the self-defense committees emerged, often at the instigation of the military forces. Regulations have been adopted for them, defining them as “groups of civilians, rural or urban, who organize spontaneously and freely to engage in activities to defend themselves against crime, prevent the infiltration of terrorism and drug-trafficking, defend themselves against attacks by terrorists and drug traffickers, and support the Peruvian Armed Forces and National Police in the work of pacification and socioeconomic development within the zones in which they operate.”(Supreme Decree 077/DE-92, April 11, 1992).

Military power has also grown relative to other institutions charged of law and order, such as the police, who are under the control and direction of the CPM in the emergency zones.

Article 137 of the Constitution provides the following framework for states of emergency:

8 Emergency zones

Maximum duration: Up to 60 days, which may be extended by the issuance of a new decree. Sphere of application: The entire national territory or part thereof.

Causes: Disturbance of the peace or of internal order; catastrophe; serious circumstances threatening the life of the nation.

Effects of the declaration: The exercise of the constitutional rights relating to personal liberty and security, the inviolability of the domicile, and freedom of assembly and movement (Article 2, subsections 9, 11, 12 and 24.f, of the Constitution) may be restricted or suspended.

Role of the armed forces: The armed forces take over control of internal order in those zones in which a state of emergency is declared, provided the President of the Republic so orders.

The constitutional rights that can be restricted or suspended in a state of emergency are stipulated as

follows in Article 2 of the Constitution, which lists the rights of the individual:

Subsection 9: To the inviolability of one's domicile. No one may enter a domicile or conduct any investigation or search thereof without the permission of the person who lives there or without a court order, except in the case of flagrante delicto or a very serious risk of crime. The exceptions made for reasons of health, sanitation, or grave peril are regulated by law.

Subsection 11: To choose one's place of residence, to travel throughout the national territory and leave and enter it, with exceptions dictated by health or a court order or immigration law.

Subsection 12: To assemble peaceably without arms. Meetings in private places or places open to the public do not require advance notification. Meetings to be held in public squares and on public thoroughfares must be reported in advance to the authority, which may prohibit them only on duly justified grounds of public safety or health.

Subsection 24: To personal liberty and security. Consequently: F) No one may be detained except by a written warrant from a judge stating the reasons therefor, or by the police authorities in a case of flagrante delicto. A person who has been arrested must be brought before the appropriate court within 24 hours or in the time it takes to travel the distance from the place of the arrest to the seat of the court.

These periods of time are not applicable to cases of terrorism, espionage, and illicit drug trafficking.

In such cases, the police authorities may hold the suspect in preventive custody for a period not to exceed 15 natural days. The police authorities must report their action to the Ministry of Justice and to the judge, who may assume jurisdiction before that period has expired.

For the elections of April 9, 1995, the National Election Board had no special plan for the zones declared to be in a state of emergency. The armed forces were not to be responsible for the custody and

Emergency zones 9 collection of the voting materials; even in the declared emergency zones, their role was confined to guarding the materials while in transit.

On election day, 12 zones were in a state of emergency: Oxapampa Province, in the Department of Pasco; Huancayo, Concepción, Jauja, Satipo, and Chanchamayo provinces, in the Department of Junín; Castrovirreynas, Huaytara, and Huancavelica provinces in the Department of Huancavelica; Lucanas, Huamanga, Cangallo and La Mar provinces, in the Department of Ayacucho; Quimbiri district, in the province of La Convención, Cuzco Department; Chincheros, Andahuaylas, Abancay and Aymaraes provinces in the Department of Apurimac; Coronel Portillo and Padre Abad provinces in the Department of Ucayali; Ucayali province, in the Department of Loreto; Puerto Inca province, in the Department of Huánuco; Lima, Barranca and Huarochirí provinces, in the Department of Lima; Constitutional Province of Callao; and Paruro, Acomayo, Chumbivilcas, Canas, and Canchis provinces, in the Department of Cuzco.

PART III Observation of the electoral process

There were three stages in the observation of the electoral process. The pre-election period, election day, and the tabulation of votes. During each stage the eight subheadquarters reported periodically to the General Coordinator. Pre-election period OAS coverage

During the run-up to election day, April 9, the Observation Mission covered 80% of the provinces of Peru, including all the integrated provincial election boards (47 provinces), the provinces on the border with Ecuador and all the districts in the Peru Sample. Perception of the OAS

The OAS Election Observation Mission received the support and confidence of the election authorities. Relations with all the members of the National Election Board, and with the 47 integrated provincial election boards, and the Electoral Registry, were excellent, characterized by coordination and mutual collaboration.

The candidates were generally cordial and interested, expressing high hopes for the work of the Mission. There were some exceptions in the stronger opposition parties (UPP, AP, CODE, APRA), which at first seemed mistrustful and in some cases even “hostile,” an attitude, largely shaped by their opinions of previous missions and by what some perceived to be the Mission's failure to address specific problems. In time, as its activities progressed, that attitude changed.

As the election process evolved, there were times when up-to-date information on candidates' campaign agendas and information requested of them concerning their platforms were not obtained. This was more of a problem in the subheadquarters since some parties, independent groups and/or political alliances did not have party headquarters there.

On the whole, the public seemed interested in the Mission's activities. However, on several occasions its nature, objectives and functions had to be made very clear, particularly the fact that OAS missions do not have the authority to institute proceedings or issue opinions on cases. Its role is not that of judge or arbiter of the election process. These things were explained at the meetings held periodically with

14 Observation of the electoral process

political parties. An attempt was also made to get these facts to the public in the interviews that the Mission Coordinator had constantly with the media. Monitoring of campaign activities

As part of their mission, the observers attended 61 campaign events, such as rallies, speaking engagements, debates, and motorcades.

Campaigning was light. There were no massive public rallies or numerous public events until two weeks before election day. The apparent apathy over the elections was due at the beginning to the border conflict with Ecuador, which, though localized, was the focus of public attention and received extensive coverage in the press and on television. This prevented effective campaigning; as the political parties or alliances lowered their election profile noticeably and concentrated on the conflict, seeking a consensus that would promote national unity. It was not until early in March that the campaign resumed in earnest, when the media began to devote more space to it. Political propaganda increased: posters, billboards, pamphlets, and radio and television advertisements.

One important matter was the free air time that were given to the various political parties for campaign advertising pursuant to Article 207 of the Organic Election Law. The Lima and Callao coordination offices monitored the drawing of lots on March 8 for 90 slots for the candidates on government radio and television (Radio Nacional and Channel 7).

In the direct observation of party campaigning, no incidents were found. It is safe to say that in general the activities were conducted in orderly fashion and in keeping with the law.

Among the people, a certain apathy and lack of enthusiasm could be felt, even toward the end of the campaign. Receiving and checking complaints

One of the functions of the OAS observers was to receive, investigate, analyze, and transmit to the competent election authorities any complaint alleging irregularities in the election process. It must be said to begin with that toward the end of the election process the issue of complaints was widely covered in the media because it had become one of the favorite subjects brought up by the opposition candidates in their speeches.

The Election Observation Mission therefore made a point of staying in contact with the various authorities in charge of receiving, handling, and/or deciding the complaints. The Mission was in constant communication with the General, Dr. Blanca Nélida Colán, who offered full cooperation from her very first official contact with the Mission Coordinator.

It should also be pointed out that her office played a leading role during the election process since most of the complaints concerned political campaigning and/or the use of government resources which are

Observation of the electoral process 15 covered in the Organic Election Law and the Penal Code, respectively. Whenever allegations of election crimes were made to the National Election Board or the provincial boards they were referred to the pertinent local prosecutor's offices for legal action. Handling of complaints

A majority of the complaints were filed by spokesmen for political alliances and parties or representatives of independent groups. In most cases they were referred to the National Election Board or the provincial board. The observers who had received them were instructed to follow them up and report on the developments in each case and the eventual outcome to the office of the General Coordinator. All statements on such cases were made through the Mission Coordinator.

Specially designed forms were used to record the complaints, to which the documentation for each was affixed. To track the status of the complaints, synoptic charts were prepared periodically showing the most recent results of the action taken by the authorities.

Of the complaints filed by the Observation Mission with the National Election Board, nine were sent to the office of the Attorney General to determine whether they involved crimes. Most of them concerned alleged campaigning for the re-election of the President.

Following are some of the most important complaints received by the Mission:

Huánuco case

On April 6, private individuals in the city of Huánuco, were found to be in possession of election materials. The confiscated material included approximately 3,000 ballots, 500 of which had been filled out in favor of certain candidates.

Because the elections were so close at hand and the complaint was so serious, the

Coordinator of the Mission met with Dr. Blanca Nélida Colán, the Attorney General, who told him she had gone to the scene and had appointed an ad hoc prosecutor to investigate the case. The National Election Board also sent one of its members, Dr. Manuel Catacora to see what had happened and prepare a report.

The principal findings of these authorities were:

• The material had been sent by staff of the National Election Board who were in

charge of dispatching election materials

• There was a connection between an adviser to a congressman and the staff member of the National Election Board who had dispatched the material; the go between was the coordinator of the Pasco Integrated Provincial Election Board

16 Observation of the electoral process

• The person to whom the material had been sent turned out to be the representative accredited by the Popular Christian Party to the Huánuco Provincial Election Board

• At the time the material was seized, 11 people were caught in the act of filling out

the ballots

• A total of 3,024 ballots were seized: 2,608 of them, blank, 360 completed, and 56 altered

• In the initial police investigations, 12 people were detained and another 5 escaped

The report concludes that the known events create a presumption that there was an

organized group whose purpose was to falsify the election results.

As soon as it had received the police report, the office of the Attorney General filed a criminal complaint, on which a preliminary inquiry was instituted for crimes against the will of the people and betrayal of the public trust. All those named were ordered arrested. Three expanded complaints were filed between April 9 and 13, based on as many police reports. Nine people were charged with corruption of public officials, crimes against the will of the people (crimes against the right of suffrage), aggravated larceny, and falsification of official documents.

After checking the facts reported in a complaint the Observation Mission closely monitored

the development of the situation. The Mission Coordinator remained in constant contact with the highest-ranking authorities of the Attorney General's office and the National Election Board.

Chachapoyas case

A complaint was filed against the Mayor of Chachapoyas and 16 other officials involved in

campaign activities and the use of public funds on behalf of the President and other candidates of the party in power. The Mission sent observers to Chachapoyas to follow up the case in situ.

The case is now with the Chachapoyas Criminal Court. Because of the indictment, the

Peruvian Government removed eight of the officials involved from their posts. Six were governors, one a deputy mayor, and another a director general of a subregion.

Armonía-Frempol case

In response to a decision by the National Election Board not to register the list of

congressional candidates that the independent group “Armonía- Frempol” had put up for the last general elections, that group, headed by Mrs. Susana Higuchi de Fujimori, instituted a series of actions with the Board seeking a reversal of the decision.

Observation of the electoral process 17

After exhausting the internal remedies without success, "Armonía-Frempol" decided to ask to the OAS Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to intercede. The Commission acted upon this petition by asking the Government of Peru to register the candidates provisionally, but its request was not granted.

At present the Commission's pronouncement on this case is pending. The Observation

Mission monitored the complaint closely.

Case of the missing election materials

In its edition of Wednesday, April 26, the newspaper El Comercio ran a story with the headline “37,000 1995 election ballots reported missing,” an occurrence that both the National Election Board and the Attorney General's office described as "serious and disturbing." The Attorney General's office appointed an ad hoc prosecutor to investigate. The concern was that the missing election materials, which also included envelopes, stamps, ink pads, pens, and other forms, might be used to commit election fraud.

Because of the seriousness of the accusations, the Coordinator of the Observation Mission

decided to hold up the final report on the April 9 election process pending the outcome of the investigation. A team of observers was assigned to keep track of developments.

As a result of the inquiries, on May 3 last, the ad hoc prosecutor filed charges in the 19th

Criminal Court of Lima against two officials of the National Election Board, the chief of the Election Materials Shipping Office and the Director General of Supplies. The charges were crimes against the right to vote and theft of public property. Two more officials of the Board, the technical advisor of the Office of the Chairman and the Chief of the Support Unit, were charged with larceny and with falsification of official documents. The court decided to issue warrants for the arrest of the first two, indicted on charges of stealing 37,000 ballots and other election-related materials. The other two were also ordered to stand trial, but were issued summonses, that is, they will not be held in custody while on trial. The National Election Board, for its part, ordered an internal investigation into the disappearance of the election materials and to determine the part played by the officials indicted.

To dispel the doubts that this case had created among the general public and the opposition

forces, and because of other alleged irregularities, the Board hastened to check the voting records by comparing those sent in the "green envelopes" with those stored in the computer system. Representatives of the political parties, the Transparencia group, the press and the OAS observers attended this review and a notary public was present throughout to certify the proceedings. This verification exercise found a discrepancy of less than 0.05% between the records compared which confirmed that the ballots counted were the same ones that the polling stations had sent to the Board.

18 Observation of the electoral process

This exercise lent added transparency to the election process, which concluded on May 12, 1995, with the delivery of credentials to President-elect Alberto Fujimori, to the two Vice Presidents on the Cambio 90-Nueva Mayoría political alliance ticket, and to the 120 Congressmen-elect.

Election day

On April 9, observation of the voting at the polling stations in the Peru Sample and the Subheadquarters Sample proceeded routinely. The observers monitored everything from the installation to the vote count at the various polling stations, including the completion of the records, which was done by filling out forms prepared for that purpose.

Of the qualitative and quantitative information on the election process, particular mention should be made of certain situations observed at the various subheadquarters that typify the main characteristics of the voting and vote count:

• Many of the poll workers were not the principal members but the alternates and even, in some cases, people standing in line waiting to vote.

• This caused delays in setting up and opening the polling stations, so that long lines formed at

each.

• Since most of the poll workers were inexperienced --for many it was the first time they had served in that capacity-- they frequently made mistakes, causing even more delays at the polling stations and problems when the time came to key in the records for the official tally.

• Not many representatives of political groups, alliances, and/or parties were at the polls. In

numbers, their order is as follows: the Alianza Electoral Cambio 90-Nueva Mayoría, Movimiento Independiente Unión por el Perú, Partido Aprista Peruano, Movimiento Independiente Code-País Posible, and the Partido Acción Popular.

• There were some delays in the delivery of election materials, because the Electoral Registry

had designated too few staff members for the purpose.

• The voting process was relatively slow, mainly because of the difficulty in getting to voting centers and finding the right polling station and because some of the poll workers and the voters themselves were so ill-informed about voting mechanisms.

• On the positive side may be cited the following: the lists of voters were signed, the secrecy

of the ballot was respected, the ballots were deposited in the ballot boxes, the inking of fingertips was properly done, the voter passbooks were stamped and signed, no pressure was exerted on voters, and, on the whole, the security forces behaved as the Election Law prescribes.

Observation of the electoral process 19

• For the first time in the recent history of general elections in Peru, the National Election Board was very strict about the closing of the polls. No extensions were authorized: at 3:00 p.m. the polling stations closed. At some of them, voters were left outside, unable to cast their vote.

• The vote count itself, while it began between 3:00 and 3:30 p.m., proceeded slowly and

with difficulty at most of the polling stations because some of the poll workers were unskilled. At some polling stations, mainly in marginal areas, the conditions were not the best for counting votes (the main problem being a lack of electric light).

• Some complications arose in filling out the tally records, particularly the interpretation of the

number of votes in relation to the number of voters for the preferential vote. The result was that at some polling stations, more voters than votes were recorded, among other errors. However, these forms were signed by the party representatives present at those polling stations.

At 5:00 p.m., materials began to be shipped in red envelopes to the tabulation centers of the

provincial boards. In many cases, this step proceeded with "average normality." The greatest difficulty occurred in the remote districts such as Chota, Cajabamba, and Celedín from which the material arrived on Monday and Tuesday.

In Lima, the shipping of the red envelopes to the tabulation centers in the various districts --Cercado de Lima, Miraflores, San Juan de Miraflores, San Luis, and San Martin de Porres also began at 5:00 p.m. Only a few arrived in the early hours, but after midnight large quantities of envelopes began to come in. At most tabulation centers, the large volume of shipments slowed down the procedure for receiving, keying, verifying and scanning the material. This was mainly because the titular members of the provincial election boards did not have enough trained staff.

Another related problem was caused by the delay on the part of some of the provincial boards in paying poll workers the 10 new soles they were owed for their services once they had completed the count. This led the workers, mainly those in Lima slums or “new towns” confront the district registrars, demanding payment of the fee and refusing to hand over the red envelopes.

Incidents like these made it impossible to have 50 percent of the vote tabulated by 11:00 p.m., as had been intended by the firm OTEPSA Service, in charge of the tabulation system, and had chosen the Department of Lima for its first official projection, since it accounted for approximately 30% of the vote nationwide.

PART IV Presence of the OAS Secretary General in Peru

OAS Secretary General César Gaviria, accompanied by his Deputy Chief of Staff, Dr. César Negret, and his press adviser, Mr. Jorge Telerman, arrived in Lima on Friday, April 7, to observe the elections. Meetings

During his visit, the Secretary General met with government, election, and political officials. On Friday, April 7, he had meetings with Mr. Alberto Fujimori, candidate for re-election as

President, running on the Alianza Cambio 90-Nueva Mayoría ticket; Dr. Efraín Goldenberg, Foreign Minister and Chairman of the Council of Ministers; the chairman and titular members of the national election board; and Dr. Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, candidate for President on the Agrupación Unión por el Perú ticket.

On Saturday, April 8, he continued his meetings and spoke with Dr. Alejandro Toledo, candidate for President on the Alianza Code-País Posible ticket; Mrs. Mercedes Cabanillas, candidate for President on the Aprista Peruano ticket; and Mr. Ricardo Belmont, candidate for President on the Agrupación Independiente Movimiento Cívico Nacional Obras ticket.

The Secretary General's arrival in Peru coincided with the filing of the complaint about stolen election material and falsified in Huánuco. News of the complaint caused a stir among the public. Given the seriousness of the allegations, the Observation Mission issued a press release reporting the steps taken and expressing the need to clear the case up quickly and thoroughly to preserve the transparency and legitimacy of the elections.

On April 8, election eve, the Secretary General and the Coordinator of the Mission attended a meeting where they heard about the misgivings of the opposition presidential candidates over the Organization and guarantees of the election process.

The Secretary General also held a press conference during which he endorsed the position taken by the Observation Mission in the Huánuco case and reasserted the OAS' commitment to the democratic process in Peru.

An election-day tour, including visits to a number of polling stations in Lima and the port of Callao, had been planned for the Secretary General and his party, among whom were the Assistant Secretary

24 Presence of the OAS Secretary General in Peru

General of the OAS, Ambassador Christopher Thomas; the Chairman of the Permanent Council of the OAS, Ambassador Marlene Villela de Talbott; and the Coordinator of the Election Observation Mission. On his rounds, the Secretary General had an opportunity to speak with poll workers and watch all participants, noting the enthusiastic turnout and the respect paid to the election process. He received a number of complaints about particular situations that were clearly local, not widespread problems that could affect the election process.

As his last activity in the country, the Secretary General gave a press conference for national and international reporters accredited to cover the elections. In his remarks he mentioned the atmosphere of calm that had prevailed on election day, with no disturbances of public order. He described the work that the Observation Mission would be doing in the post-election period, which included observation of the official tabulation of votes and the follow up of complaints.

Finally, he thanked the Peruvian political and election authorities and the general citizenry for the courtesies and facilities provided to the Mission.

PARTS V and VI Election results and Final comments

Election results

The April 9 election returned then President Alberto Fujimori to office until the year 2000. The two vice presidential candidates running on his ticket were elected, as were 120 representatives for the new unicameral Congress from the several political organizations now participating in the Peruvian political system. Cambio 90-Nueva Mayoría won an absolute majority of the seats in Congress. These results were announced in Electoral Board resolutions 224-95, of April 28, 1995, and 226-95, of May 5, 1995. Final comments

Two types of comments arise out of the work done by the OAS Mission in Peru to observe the general elections held on April 9. Comments on the OAS observation model The feasibility of smaller missions:

The experience acquired in observing the Peruvian general elections showed that missions can be organized with fewer people than had been used in previous OAS-organized missions.

The model used in this mission began with the design of a statistical sample (the Peru Sample) that would have to be covered for a "quick count" on election day. Once the sample had been decided, the number of observers required to cover the area in the sample was determined, which was 50. In all, the Mission was composed of 70 people.

The logistical aspects were carefully planned to make up for the small number of observers relative to the size of the country's population. Means of transportation and communication were plentiful, and most of the observers and technical, administrative, and logistical personnel on the Mission were experienced.

The strategy developed for election day relied on the element of surprise, achieved by not revealing the polling stations in the Peru Sample. With over 70,000 polling stations nationwide, it was impossible to predict which had been selected for the quick count.

28 Election results and Final comments

Work with other organizations

During the work of the Observation Mission contacts were made with national and international NGOs conducting election-related projects.

In the case of Transparencia, a national NGO organized to observe and do a "quick count" on election day, the coordination was constant. Information was exchanged, Transparencia members took part in the training activities conducted by the OAS Electoral Technical Assistance Mission, and the computer technicians of both organizations held meetings. On election day, the Observation Mission and Transparencia kept in touch with each other concerning the results of the projection prepared by Transparencia for announcement.

The Observation Mission established a fluid cooperative relationship with the outside organizations (USAID, IFES, NDI, IRI), with the result that they eventually joined in its work on election day. This added considerably to the number of observers, giving the Mission a larger presence.

The work done with these organizations should be repeated in future observation missions, since this kind of cooperation provides the missions with resources they would otherwise not have. Comments on the Peruvian election process

On election day, voters came to the polls in an atmosphere of calm: there were no disruptions of public order. Small problems occurred with the distribution of election materials at the polling stations, and there were delays in setting up the polls and getting the voting started. These are the same kinds of problems found on election day throughout the hemisphere and were not a widespread factor that could have compromised the outcome.

The role played by the armed forces in this electoral process was a radical departure from their role in previous elections. This time, they confined themselves to guarding shipments of election materials, a function that was the responsibility of the officials of the National Election Board. Also, they had no hand in designating replacements for absent poll workers. With these changes, stipulated in the Organic Election Law, the armed forces resumed their traditional role of maintaining public order during public voting occasions.

The present design of the election materials, particularly the voting records and the attached preferential-vote sheet, was confusing for the poll workers, causing them to fill in the forms incorrectly.

Unforeseen problems arose in the tabulation of the votes --mistakes made by poll workers completing the tabulation forms and not noticed by the party representatives present, most of whom signed the forms. As a result, there were an unusual number of invalid ballots, which explains the discrepancy between the total numbers of votes cast for President and for members of Congress. This led to some delay in the announcement of the final results.

Election results and Final comments 29

There were numerous complaints of electioneering and the use of government resources in the President’s re-election campaign. These were made against public officials and in some cases resulted in the filing of criminal complaints. These cases are still in progress.

Because of the imminence of the elections, the seriousness of the allegations and its impact on public opinion, the Huánuco case was the most serious of all the complaints brought to the Mission's attention in the pre-election period. In the post-election period the complaint about the missing election materials was the most important.

In both cases the authorities of the National Election Board and the Ministry of Justice acted quickly and were able to determine that these were not part of a widespread attempt at fraud, but localized crimes committed for money.

In the case of the missing election materials, the National Election Board decided to compare the voting record forms, the images of which were shown on the computer screens, with the voting records of the National Election Board contained in the so-called “green envelope,” to see whether the election results tabulated on the record forms matched the “confirmation records” (green envelope) deposited with the National Election Board. A notary public, the OAS observers, representatives of the various political groups and of the Transparencia association were present throughout, as were the media.

The high incidence of invalid votes is attributable to two factors: (a) the elimination of the “canteo de votos”, the old system under which election boards would negotiate decisions not to challenge records with certain correctable errors; and (b) for this election, for the first time of computers to do the vote recount, in which the system, like any other computerized system, rejected the double preferential vote, so that there were sometimes more votes than voters. The National Election Board issued a release clarifying these matters.

No political group filed a formal appeal with the Board seeking the nullification of either the presidential or the congressional results.

The regulation of election law also requires a set of mechanisms that form a solid foundation of electoral and political democracy. This calls for such actions as updating the electoral register, setting practical territorial elections; and giving the election authorities their own infrastructure to handle such matters as printing and preparing election materials and tallying the results. The point is that all this strengthening should serve to transform the electoral institution into an administratively and budgetarily dynamic system.

Democracy is the convergence of thought, institutions, and reality; this is what gives it its social dynamic. Motivating citizens and training them to participated actively in elections, as a right or as a duty, should become a commitment to enabling them to exercise this right and assume this duty in full knowledge of the political rules of play. The authority in charge of the most recent elections made significant progress in this direction.

30 Election results and Final comments

For its part, the General Secretariat of the OAS believes that with the work done by the Secretary

General's Observation Mission it has not only fulfilled its commitment to democracy in Peru, but also made progress towards helping to strengthen the institutions of democracy in the hemisphere, thereby complying with the mandate conferred upon it during the Summit of the Americas, (Miami, November 1994) and the Unit for the Promotion of Democracy.