This statement is offered by an international pre-election delegation to Peru, organized jointly by the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and Áù¾ÅÉ«ÌÃ. The delegation visited Peru from March 17 through March 24, 2000. This is the third in a series of NDI/Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà Center delegations that have observed the pre-election period. In addition, Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà and NDI have established a continuous presence in Peru from January until after the elections. Another NDI/Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà Center delegation is likely to visit the country in the period immediately following the April 9 elections, in order to more fully assess the entire electoral process.
SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS
The electoral environment in Peru is characterized by polarization, anxiety and uncertainties. The conditions for a fair election campaign have not been established. Irreparable damage to the integrity of the election process has already been done, but improvements still can and should be made because candidates and parties are competing, citizens are participating in the process, and the electoral outcomes are not assured.
International experience has demonstrated that where confidence in the electoral process has been shaken, extraordinary steps by the government and electoral authorities are often needed to restore or establish that confidence. Such extraordinary steps must go beyond minimum requirements for democratic elections. This lesson is clearly applicable in Peru, where public opinion surveys have consistently shown that a substantial portion of the population has doubts about the fairness and integrity of the upcoming elections.
In early December and then in February, the NDI/Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà Center delegations concluded that flaws in Peru's pre-election environment and the lack of public confidence in the election process and its surrounding institutional framework were so serious that extraordinary, immediate and comprehensive measures were necessary if the April 9 elections were to meet international standards.
This delegation recognizes that a number of steps have been taken by the government to address electoral problems. However, neither the timeliness nor scope of those efforts has been sufficient to overcome the serious flaws that were noted by the earlier delegations. In addition, new issues emerged that further eroded the possibilities for an open and competitive process leading up to the April 9 elections.
Despite serious obstacles, opposition candidates and political parties are nonetheless campaigning actively. Domestic nonpartisan election monitoring organizations, the Ombudsman's Office and others are working to improve the democratic character of the elections. In addition, the outcomes of the elections -- at both the presidential and congressional levels -- are not foregone conclusions. Therefore, this delegation is not making a final assessment of the elections.
The remaining days of the campaign, election day and the immediate post-election period all require extensive observation by the Peruvian people and the international community. The delegation hopes that the government and electoral authorities will exert maximum efforts to produce the best possible circumstances for the elections. With this in mind, the delegation offers recommendations at the conclusion of this statement.
THE DELEGATION AND ITS WORK
The March 2000 pre-election delegation included: Kenneth Wollack, President of the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI); Charles Costello, Director of the Democracy Program at Áù¾ÅÉ«ÌÃ; Guillermo Marquez, former President of the Elections Tribunal in Panama; Gerardo Le Chevallier, NDI Director for Latin America and the Caribbean; Shelley McConnell, Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà Center Associate Director for Latin America and the Caribbean; and Patrick Merloe, NDI Senior Associate and Director of Programs on Election and Political Processes. The delegation was joined by Luis Nunes, Project Director, and Barry Levitt, Senior Political Analyst, NDI/Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà Center Joint Election Observation Mission in Peru.
The delegation was invited by the government of Peru and Peruvian civic and political leaders. The delegation's observations are based upon an extensive series of meetings with: candidates and political party leaders; representatives of the government, including the President, Prime Minister and Minister of Defense; electoral authorities, including the Jurado Nacional de Elecciones (JNE) and the Oficina Nacional de Procesos Electorales (ONPE); the Defensoria del Pueblo (Ombudsman's Office); nongovernmental organizations, including Transparencia; the news media; the Catholic Church; and local experts in public opinion research and political analysis.
The delegation was also informed by the research of the NDI/Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà Center field representatives, the work of the two earlier delegations and the work of the Organization of American States (OAS) and other international organizations that are concerned with the election process. The delegation would like to express its gratitude to everyone with whom it has met for sharing their time and views.
NDI and Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà are independent, nongovernmental organizations that have conducted more than 100 impartial pre-election, election-day and post-election observation delegations in the Americas and around the globe. The purposes of this delegation were to express the support of the international community for a democratic election process in Peru and to assess the evolving political environment surrounding the upcoming elections, as well as the state of electoral preparations.
The delegation conducted its activities according to international standards for nonpartisan international election observation and Peruvian law. NDI and Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà do not seek to interfere in the election process nor, at this juncture, to make a final assessment about the overall process. Both institutions recognize that, ultimately, it will be the people of Peru who will determine the legitimacy of the elections and of the resulting government.
An accurate and complete assessment of any election must take into account all aspects of the electoral process. These include:
At the same time, no election can be viewed in isolation of the political context in which it takes place. The pre-election period, including electoral preparations and the political environment, must be given considerable weight when evaluating the democratic nature of elections, because this period is central to democratic electoral competition. This is the time when citizens become keenly aware of their power to select representatives to carry the electorate's mandate to govern.
Parties and candidates mobilize their supporters in a test of political pluralism, as they compete for votes. If candidates and parties do not have a fair opportunity to compete (the so-called "level playing field") or the electorate does not receive adequate information to make an informed choice among them and adequate information about when, where and how to vote, doubt can be cast over the nature of the entire election process.
ELECTORAL CONTEXT
The December NDI/Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà Center delegation found that the pre-election environment and institutional framework in Peru were marked by serious flaws that to overcome required "concerted and sustained efforts" if the electoral process was to meet international standards. Among other issues, that delegation pointed to the lack of media access for opposition candidates, biased news coverage, a distinct lack of coverage of issues that could affect voter choices, violation of press freedoms, problems with the legal framework and judicial remedies, lack of confidence in electoral institutions and use of state resources to gain electoral advantage.
The February delegation observed that the electoral process was still marred and in many respects conditions had worsened since early December. The delegation again highlighted continued problems with media access and bias, as well as inappropriate use of state resources in the campaign. In addition, the delegation pointed to harassment campaigns in the media against candidates, domestic election observers and the Ombudsman's Office, and noted what appeared to be an orchestration aimed to ensure a specific legal outcome on the issue of the President standing for re-election.
The February delegation noted that effective measures needed to be implemented "immediately and comprehensively" so that the credibility of the process might be established and international standards met.
The government sought to respond to recommendations offered by NDI/Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà Center delegations and others. Access to the state-owned media for candidates was expanded from 30 to 45 days, and the private broadcast media extended a limited amount of restricted air time free of charge to political parties, which has mainly benefited congressional candidates. A hotline for election complaints was established, and special prosecutors were named for the election districts. The Prime Minister issued a written instruction to public authorities to respect the law and not use state resources to support or oppose electoral candidates.
The remaining Emergency Zones were lifted prior to the elections. In addition, resources were allocated to the ONPE to conduct large-scale voter education. Many of these steps, however, came late and have not proven sufficient to overcome the media disadvantage for the opposition, to overcome the apparent lack of public awareness about voting procedures or to counteract perceptions of impunity for electoral abuse.
As the government was taking these steps, problems identified by the two previous NDI/Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà Center delegations persisted or worsened.
In addition to these problems, the case has emerged alleging falsification of signatures to qualify the Independent National Front Peru 2000 (Frente Nacional Independiente Peru 2000 or the "Peru 2000 Front"), one of the political groups that formed the Peru 2000 Alliance to promote President Fujimori's candidacy for re-election and to field a list of candidates for Congress. This case has not been handled in a manner that would help to remedy its negative impact on public confidence, which reinforces a sense that electoral manipulations take place with impunity.
The withdrawal of two candidates for Congress who may have been associated with the alleged falsifications, the withdrawal of the Peru 2000 Front from the Peru 2000 Alliance and the convenient summary decertification by the JNE of the Peru 2000 Front do not address the underlying allegations or the extent to which persons associated with the electoral authorities may have participated in the falsification.
The scandal has further shaken public confidence in the authorities responsible for organizing the elections. The possible involvement of ONPE officials in the alleged falsification scheme has damaged the credibility of the very organization whose mandate it is to guarantee the integrity of the election process. The lack of information concerning the special prosecutor's (fiscal especial) criminal investigation of the alleged fraud and the apparent inaction by the relevant electoral bodies, the JNE and ONPE, have called into question the credibility of the judicial process and the electoral authorities.
The conditions surrounding the falsification scandal as well as problems with media access and press freedoms obliged the OAS Electoral Observation Mission in its March 17 press release to express "deep concern over the worsening of the deficiencies exhibited by the electoral process and that were detailed in our Bulletin No. 1," on March 10. The OAS Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression reported on March 8 that numerous limitations on freedom of expression in Peru represent "a serious obstacle for the normal development of the election process."
Public opinion research shows that large segments of the electorate are not sufficiently aware of voting procedures. Given the unusually high percentage of annulled ballots in the 1995 elections and the complexity of voting for congressional candidates, many of those with whom the delegation met expressed concern that voter education efforts by ONPE thus far have not been sufficient. Even though the time remaining before the elections is critically short, mounting massive voter education efforts is one of the most important actions that can still be done to improve the nature of the election process.
As the spotlight shifts to election day, attention is needed to ensure the integrity of the processes for casting and counting of ballots, and for tabulating and announcing results that accurately reflect the will of the electorate. In this respect, the efforts of party and candidate agents (personeros), nonpartisan Peruvian election observers, the Ombudsman's Office, the media and international election observers are crucial. The election authorities must guarantee access to all aspects of election-day processes and the tabulation of results, including ONPE's computer systems and its planned unofficial parallel tabulation of presidential and congressional results.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Even though it is critically late in the pre-election period and irreparable damage has been done to the integrity of the election process, improvements can and should still be made. With this in mind, and in the continued spirit of international cooperation, the delegation offers the following recommendations.
Over the past four months there have been lost opportunities to create a genuinely open and democratic pre-election environment. While fulfillment of the recommendations mentioned above cannot offset the serious flaws identified by NDI/Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà Center delegations and other observers, they can help reduce the risk that Peruvian citizens will ultimately view the overall process as illegitimate. NDI and Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà will continue to monitor developments surrounding the elections and will issue additional statements as appropriate.
Please sign up below for important news about the work of Áù¾ÅÉ«Ìà and special event invitations.