CNE SHOWDOWN WITH OAS AND CARTER CENTER

C O N F I D E N T I A L CARACAS 001656

SIPDIS


NSC FOR CBARTON
USCINCSO ALSO FOR POLAD
STATE PASS USAID FOR DCHA/OTI

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/04/2014
TAGS: PGOV PHUM KDEM VE
SUBJECT: CNE SHOWDOWN WITH OAS AND CARTER CENTER

REF: A. CARACAS 1542


B. CARACAS 1507

C. CARACAS 1346

Classified By: Abelardo A. Arias, Political Counselor, for Reasons 1.4(
b) and (d).

--------------
Summary
--------------


1. (C) National Electoral Council (CNE) President Francisco
Carrasquero issued an ultimatum to the OAS and The Carter
Center (TCC) to either retract their statement of May 12 or
the CNE would reconsider the OAS/TCC observation mission of
the recall referendum against President Hugo Chavez. The May
12 statement rejected the GOV's position that people who
signed the recall petition against President Hugo Chavez may
withdraw their names if they change their minds. The OAS/TCC
responded May 13 recognizing that the political actors had
agreed on the point even though it went beyond the CNE norms.
Debate at the CNE continues, meanwhile, as rules are worked
out for the verification of identity documents at the appeals
centers and for the count of the results. The CNE has
printed the registers for the appeals ("cuadernos") and will
make them available to the political actors and international
observers for review. The dispute with the OAS/TCC may blow
over as it is not in the interest of either side to lose the
international observers at this time. End summary.

--------------
CNE Throws Temper Tantrum
--------------


2. (U) National Electoral Council (CNE) President Francisco
Carrasquero demanded on May 13 that the OAS and the Carter
Center (TCC) retract a statement made on May 12 regarding
norms for the May 27-31 signature appeals process.
Carrasquero said that by emitting publicly an opinion on the
CNE's norms, the international observers violated the
November 2003 agreement with the CNE. If the OAS/TCC did not
apologize or clarify their position, he said, the CNE would
reconsider the continuation of the international observer
missions. Minutes earlier, CNE Director Jorge Rodriguez
(pro-GOV) accused the OAS/TCC of siding with the opposition
and said he would no longer meet with OAS/TCC representatives
until they apologized. Rodriguez left the future of the
missions open, saying he preferred that the OAS/TCC remain in
the country because "the CNE has nothing to hide."


3. (C) The blow-up centers on whether signers of the recall
petition against Chavez may "repent" and withdraw their
signatures during the appeals period. In the May 12
statement, the OAS/TCC said that CNE norms and international
standards dictated that the act of signing, like that of
voting, is a unique expression of will and cannot be changed
during the appeals process. CNE rules issued in September
said that names could be withdrawn from the petition only if
the person claimed that he or she had not actually signed.
Chavez supporters -- and the CNE's chavista majority --
maintain that anyone who changed his mind could remove his
signature. Chief OAS observer Marcelo Alvarez told poloff
that it is not fair to permit some people to remove their
names without letting others who did not sign the original
petition the option of adding their names.

--------------
OAS/TCC Makes Up
--------------


4. (U) The OAS/TCC issued a new statement on May 13
responding to the CNE's demands for an apology. The
statement "clarified" the position of the international
observers that they continue to support the literal
translation of the rules -- that only those whose identities
were usurped may withdraw. OAS/TCC added, however, that they
recognized that the political actors had agreed with the CNE
that to avoid new procedures, "the simple manifestation of
the person's desire was sufficient" to include or exclude

them from the lists. (Comment: This is an artful step back
from the May 12 statement and reflects the opposition stand
on this point. End comment.)

--------------
Technical Issues Debate Continues
--------------


5. (U) The CNE continues to prepare for the two appeals
process (opposition deputies May 20-24 and the presidential
May 27-31). The role of poll workers remains in dispute.
For example, the CNE's legal counsel Andres Brito again
circulated a draft instruction May 11 that reportedly would
allow poll workers at the appeals centers to reject an appeal
if they could not verify the identity of the person making
the appeal. The opposition had objected to an earlier
instruction granting poll workers this authority due to
concerns that it could be abused to refuse appeals
arbitrarily. (Note: It has been a common practice within
the CNE to leak draft rules that disadvantage the opposition.
In the past these have been opening negotiating positions
that the opposition has had to walk back.)


6. (U) The CNE is also scheduled to discuss a resolution
spelling out the verification procedure for the appeals
process. Chavez opponents had complained that the CNE's
rules could permit hundreds of appeals to be invalidated
through alleged errors in the daily tally sheets ("actas").
Jorge Rodriguez denied the accusations, saying that any
errors in the tally sheets would be resolved by consulting
the registers ("cuadernos") where the appeals are recorded.
(Note: The CNE denied about 150,000 signatures during the
first verification process for errors in the tally sheets.)


7. (U) The 6000-plus registers for the appeals were ready as
of May 12, Rodriguez announced. The registers correspond to
specific appeals center; each table in the centers will
receive one register for those want to reaffirm their
signature and one for those who want to withdraw their
signatures. The NGO Sumate raised a red flag noting that the
registers must be audited before being sent to appeals
centers to ensure they match the data the CNE provided to the
Coordinadora Democratica (CD). Rodriguez said May 12 that
the CD, the pro-Chavez Comando Ayacucho, and the
international observers would be allowed on May 13 to take a
statistical sample of the registers to assure their accuracy.

--------------
Comment
--------------


8. (C) The CNE's public ultimatum may be bluster or a
negotiating tactic. The CNE has complained before that the
OAS/TCC tries to usurp its authority. The GOV thus far has
indicated its interest in holding the appeals process, which
it expects to win. Without the OAS/TCC, the opposition would
pull out and the presidential referendum process would die.
The GOV is also aware that the OAS and TCC would release
their observation reports upon leaving the country, which
reportedly will put the blame on the GOV for sinking the
process. It is in neither side's interest at this time to
lose the international observers.

SHAPIRO


NNNN

2004CARACA01656 - CONFIDENTIAL