FINAL STATEMENT BY STATE SUPREME COURT JUDGES

 

We, the undersigned, served as international observers of the presidential election in Venezuela on December 3, 2006.  We were invited by the National Electoral Council (CNE), an independent branch of the Venezuelan government, which oversees and manages the electoral system.

 

On Election Day, we visited approximately ten voting centers where, from the opening to the closing of polls, we monitored all phases of the balloting process and the initial count of the votes.  At some site visits, formally scheduled in advance, we were accompanied by CNE officials.  At other voting centers we were unaccompanied, dropping in unannounced.

 

Our objective was to evaluate whether this was a free and fair election; that is, whether the election produced an outcome expressing the will of the Venezuelan people.

 

According to published reports, about 11.5 million voters, constituting 70% of the electorate, participated in the election.  Hugo Chavez, the incumbent president, won 61% of the vote; Manuel Rosales garnered 38%; minor candidates split the balance.

 

All participants enjoyed equal access to voting centers.  Elderly persons, disabled, and pregnant women were not required to wait in line.  The waiting time for others varied, depending on voter turnout and time of day.  Voters cast their ballots freely, in secret, and without intimidation or manipulation.

 

The authorities administering the balloting were well trained-carrying out their duties in an impartial, efficient and courteous manner.  Representatives of the two major candidates, serving as official witnesses, were present at each voting site and were provided full access to observe the check-in, voting, tallying and transmission process.  Partisan witnesses for both candidates expressed unqualified approval of the management of polls.

 

Military personnel maintained order by their presence, without any apparent threat or use of force.

 

The automated voting machines are user-friendly, speedy, accurate, reliable and secure.  The mechanized process enables each voter to touch-screen vote and electronically verify his/her selection.  The machine then generates a paper receipt, which the individual examines to determine whether the machine correctly recorded the vote.  In this way, the Venezuelan voting system provides each voter both electronic and paper confirmation.

 

The voter then deposits the paper receipt in a sealed box.  Finally, before exiting, the voter dips a fingertip in ink to signify that he/she has voted, retrieves the identification card that he/she turned in at entry, and leaves.  After the polls have closed, in a randomly-selected audit of 54% of the voting tables within the polling sites, the paper receipts are manually counted and their totals are compared to the electronic results.

 

The state-of-the-art tallying and transmission system functioned accurately and efficiently. 

 

To ensure the integrity of the ballot, appropriate measures- identification cards, voter list verification, finger-printing, and finger ink-dipping after voting- were taken to prevent unregistered or multiple voting.

 

Each citizen’s vote was accorded equal weight.

 

We observed no evidence of fraud or other illegality.

 

In all respects, the entire voting process- its institutional framework, official actions and decisions- were open to the participants and the public.

 

The December 3, 2006 presidential election was free, fair, and transparent.  It ensured the honest expression of the will of the Venezuelan people- the hallmark of a representative and accountable democracy.

 

Caracas, Venezuela

December 4, 2006

 

Emily Goodman, Justice

New York State Supreme Court

 

Henry Hamilton, Former Magistrate

State of Iowa

 

James Gramling, Judge

Milwaukee Municipal Court

 

Laura Safer Espinoza, Justice

New York State Supreme Court

 

Gustin Reichbach, Justice

New York State Supreme Court

 

Charles B. Schudson, Reserve Judge

State of Wisconsin

 

Analisa Torres, Justice

New York State Supreme Court

 

Frank Torres, Retired Justice

New York State Supreme Court

 

Jean Pierre Urgin, Judge

Montpelier, France

 

*All judicial titles are for identification purposes, only.