1. Interviews/Visits
|
1. Acknowledgements
|
To utilize past research contacts and broaden the scope of the investigation, one member of the team interviewed people in the municipality of Juchitán while the remaining members of the team conducted a series of interviews prearranged by members of the Consulting Center for Development of Indigenous Communities (CADEPI) in cooperation with Alianza Cívica.
The group of five had the opportunity to interview actors from a wide range of political and organizational settings. Meetings were held with three Municipal Presidents, two from the PRI representing Matías Romero and San Juan Guichicovi and one from the PRD representing Santo Domingo de Petapa. We also interviewed members of Municipal Collaboration Boards (Consejos de Colaboración del Ayuntamiento), parallel governments composed of PRD representatives in San Juan Guichicovi and Santa María Petapa. The state government established these Boards after the winner of the municipal elections, the PRI, refused to incorporate members of the runner-up party, the PRD, into the administration as required by law. Finally, discussions were held in Matías Romero with representatives from four NGOs: CADEPI, the National Unifying Movement of Retirees and Pensioners (MUNJP), an environmental and indigenous rights organization representing communities in the southeast of Mexico (Maderas), and the Union of Indigenous Communities of the Northern Zone of the Isthmus (UCIZONIS). In Juchitán, the observer met with leading intellectuals including the Director of the Casa de la Cultura, COCEI representatives, and PRI activists.
Overall our group was well received and was able to conduct open and frank discussions. Our only difficulty came when we questioned townspeople lined up outside the municipal offices in San Juan Guichicovi. Although several women said they were there for an electoral/campaign event, the individual in charge of coordinating the federal PROGRESA program intervened and told them in their native Mixe language to be careful about what they said.
Opinions regarding the electoral scene varied, particularly between members of the PRI and the PRD. Although many acknowledged progress in recent years, the majority portrayed a situation in which votes are bought and sold, manipulation is common, and local practice falls short of the standards set by the nation’s electoral authorities. Among the general areas of concern raised by the people interviewed were vote buying and coercion prior to the elections, a pattern of irregularities on election day, a lack of information regarding the election process and citizen rights, and threats and intimidation that affect the general electoral setting.
2. Political Context
Extreme poverty, marginalization, and a large indigenous population characterize the southern state of Oaxaca. For decades many parts of the state have been ruled by the PRI with little opposition. Yet some regions have been hotly contested, especially the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, the area visited by the delegation. Juchitán, in the heart of the Isthmus, is the home of the well-established and well-known Leftist indigenous movement, the Worker, Peasant, and Student Coalition of the Isthmus (COCEI). Since 1990, Juchitán mayors have all hailed from the COCEI. Other Isthmus communities have also had a history of opposition success, labor militancy, and independent peasant movements. Historically, the PAN has had a minor presence in the state, except in regions such as Huajuapan de León and Oaxaca City. Beginning in 1996, the Popular Revolutionary Army (EPR) launched a series of attacks in communities in Oaxaca. Despite that circumstance, we saw little sign of a military presence that would affect elections in the Isthmus.
3. Vote Buying and Political Coercion
Perhaps the greatest concern of those interviewed centered on the distribution of resources and services by government and party representatives for the purpose of buying or coercing the vote for a specific party or candidate. Although PRI mayors generally denied the charges, others described at length how the distribution of payments and benefits from government programs were tied in some way to a vote for a particular party, almost always the PRI. The sources of these payments and benefits included federal programs such as PROGRESA, PROCAMPO, PROCEDE, and DIF; a state job training program, PROBECA; direct transfers to municipal governments; and public works programs. Often the observers found that the directors of these programs had family or political ties to local authorities. A majority of those interviewed suggested that access to these benefits was often directly or indirectly linked to the electoral process. In some cases, local authorities solicited information from the voter identification cards of beneficiaries and their families when they came to collect their benefits, or they reduced or denied benefits if the card was not presented. In other cases, they explicitly conditioned benefits on support for a particular party, for example by requiring citizens to attend political/electoral events, threatening to withhold benefits if citizens failed to vote for a particular party, denying services to individuals or communities affiliated with the opposition, and timing payments to coincide with campaign events. According to many of those interviewed, such irregularities were already taking place in preparation for the July 2 election.
Most suggested that the practice of providing resources to induce the vote tended to occur close to election day. In some cases, party officials or candidates distributed benefits from the government programs discussed above. People also described how, during recent state elections, PRI representatives or candidates and in one case a PAN candidate provided staples (rice, sugar, cooking oil), building materials, and even cash to individuals in return for promises to vote for their party or candidate. Many of these gifts were provided on the day of the vote itself. Some witnesses testified that such resources are already being collected and stored in preparation for massive handouts prior to the July 2 contest. One group insisted to us that the home of the city’s mayor was already well stocked with basic provisions and materials for this purpose.
The general view expressed by almost all of those interviewed was that these practices are widespread and that the political culture is one in which the poor, often illiterate, and largely indigenous population cast their vote for the official party because of their great fear of losing government benefits and, consequently, an unwillingness to denounce irregularities. Moreover, the general lack of information about electoral regulations and procedures provides an additional obstacle to filing official complaints.
In Juchitán, by contrast, PRI hegemony has not been so complete and a highly aware citizenry defends their votes. Ballot stuffing and other traditional forms of vote fraud were perceived as unlikely to occur there largely because voting booths are closely watched by both the PRI and COCEI. Because of COCEI’s control of the municipality, resources for scholarships, bus and airline tickets, basic provisions, and other resources traditionally used by the PRI to induce the vote are now at the disposal of the Left. Ironically, COCEI’s long-term control of the Juchitán city government has provided the movement with most of the means of patronage traditionally associated with the PRI. In recent years, there have been accusations of vote buying and manipulation of resources by COCEI officials in an effort to induce the vote for the PRD.
4. Pattern of Election Day Irregularities
Drawing on recent experiences, people we interviewed also described a pattern of irregularities that occur on the day of the election. Among the most disturbing was the lack of a secret ballot. Some people, including the PRI mayor of Matías Romero, insisted that the vote was secret, but many others disagreed. The PRI mayor in San Juan Guichicovi, for example, explained that, in the town of Chocolate, the vote was traditionally open and people filled out their ballots in clear view of party officials. The PRD mayor in Santo Domingo Petapa concurred that the vote was not secret, particularly in outlying areas, and that parties did not view it as advantageous to have a secret ballot. In some cases, public officials seemed wholly unconcerned about guaranteeing the secrecy of the vote. Many NGO representatives corroborated reports of this practice although it seemed to vary from community to community. Not only is open voting a clear violation of electoral law, but it makes credible the threats and blackmail associated with the delivery of government services or partisan resources mentioned earlier.
Other voting day irregularities reported to the observers included the delivery and transportation of ballot boxes and other voting materials in PRI vehicles over long distances with extensive delays; PRI officials serving as precinct workers; and the distribution of provisions and cash payments by party officials to citizens or local precinct workers. Representatives from the NGO Maderas described how, during recent state elections, citizens from outlying areas of the Chimalapas had to travel more than 5 hours to reach the polling place. This excessive distance reduces turnout, particularly among women, and in some cases facilitates outright fraud by precinct officials who carry the voter lists to the people to collect their signatures, thus enabling party or election officials to mark unused ballots for their candidates. Though it is impossible to predict whether such practices will mark the upcoming election, the pattern nonetheless creates an unfavorable environment for honest, transparent elections.
5. Atmosphere of Intimidation
Another problem identified by many of the people we interviewed were acts of intimidation that exacerbated an overall climate of fear and a lack of confidence in the mechanics of the electoral process. Representatives of Maderas noted the frequent need to show voter registration cards at military checkpoints, particularly near the border with Chiapas. They explained that, in addition to the threats and harassment against NGO representatives, peasants are normally warned by the military not to affiliate with such groups. Another NGO, UCIZONI, reported acts of harassment and intimidation against their members and the communities where they have a presence.
6. Information
Another concern was the lack of information and misinformation about electoral procedures and citizens’ rights. This problem includes confusion or ignorance about electoral procedures, the unavailability of information in indigenous languages, and the absence of official information promoting free and fair elections. Many of the public officials we interviewed claimed not to have received pamphlets and booklets from IFE or other organizations regarding citizens’ rights and electoral laws. The team saw no posters in public spaces advising citizens of their rights or proper electoral regulations although such posters could be found in NGO offices and UCIZONI organizes workshops to inform people of their rights in their own language. By contrast, campaign propaganda could be found throughout the communities.
The lack of adequate information can be seen in the lack of access to mass media in smaller urban areas such as Matías Romero, not to mention rural communities which rely on personal communication and radio for information. The lack of information breeds confusion and misinformation. One witness believed that the primary election for the PRI candidate was actually the presidential election. Another noted that government representatives and PRI activists advised peasants to look for the colors of the Mexican flag in casting their vote.
Conclusion
Many of those interviewed acknowledged progress in recent years on the electoral front. The mayor of Matías Romero in particular suggested that the practices and irregularities described here are a thing of the past and no longer occur, that people are free to vote according to their consciences and that government benefits are provided without electoral threats or promises. In Juchitán, the strength of the Left has averted outright vote fraud. But political coercion, vote buying, and a lack of electoral information are widespread in the remoter areas of the state and they affect the climate in which preparations for the July 2 national elections are taking place.