Guerrero
Introduction
The Guerrero delegation was made up of thirteen people, among them,
academics, a bio-technology researcher, a doctor, a health worker,
students, an accountant, a computer scientist, a community outreach
coordinator and two Global Exchange representatives. The Guerrero
delegation arrived in Chilpancingo three days before the July 2
elections in order to evaluate pre-electoral conditions. The
delegation met with IFE officials, human rights leaders, party
representatives, and journalists before splitting into two groups to
observe the elections in La Montaña and Costa Grande.
The delegation targeted these two regions because of their intensely
complicated political culture. In Guerrero the federal elections were
set against the backdrop of extreme levels of rural poverty, the
presence of four distinct indigenous ethnicities, a political heritage
of caciquismo, a persistent history of severe political violence,
human rights abuses and impunity for government officials involved in
such abuses, the presence of two armed insurrection movements, highly
organized drug-traffickers, the militarization of the state, and often
violent tension between the PRI and the PRD.
Role of Electoral Institutions
The Global Exchange pre-electoral report of June 2000 emphasized the
extraordinary efforts made by the state IFE officials in the areas of
voter education, media oversight, preparation of registered voter
lists, and training of IFE volunteers. The IFE officials expressed
that despite their exhaustive work at the state level, the political
culture in Guerrero would make it difficult for them to prevent minor
irregularities at the local level.
The Federal Electoral Tribunal (Tribunal Federal Electoral -TRIFE)
makes final rulings on the validity of results, and the Special
Prosecutor's Office for Electoral Crimes (Fiscalía Especializada
para Atención a Delitos Electorales--FEPADE) enforces electoral
laws. State IFE officials expressed concern about the ability of
either of these organizations to make independent judgments since they
both have ties to the executive branch. IFE officials sent
denunciations of electoral irregularities to the FEPADE that were
still being processed after several months. The FEPADE had sent no
information concerning the status of the denunciations.
The state representative of the PAN-dominated Alliance for Change
(Alianza por el Cambio) supported this view. They filed denunciations
for two cases in which PRI party representatives had distributed
products to influence voters in Santa Catarina and San Marcos. The
local attorney general's office rejected their claims.
Pre-Electoral Climate and Militarization
The observers' meetings with human rights organizers and party
representatives in Chilpancingo made it clear that human rights
violations carried out by the various police bodies, the military and
paramilitary units with the collaboration of local caciques are still
an alarming problem in La Montaña, Costa Grande, and Costa Chica.
On June 30, several military vehicles circulated in Coyuca de
Benítez in the Costa Grande. At 10 p.m., these vehicles, including
trucks, vans, and cars, parked across the street from the house of
Hilda Navarrete Goyon, a well-known human rights activist. The
soldiers and police stayed approximately one hour. According to
Ms. Navarrete Goyon, such military presence in Coyuca is a regular
occurrence.
In Cucuyachi, a small community in Costa Grande, severe internal
conflicts have altered the life of the community. Six weeks before the
elections, a group of armed men recognized to be supporters of the
former cacique shot down the Commissioner of communal land affairs in
the region as he was walking on the road. The Commissioner's son
relocated to Chilpancingo for safety reasons, but he returned to the
community to vote. The government uses the suspected presence of
guerrillas and drug-traffickers in the region as the official
rationale for the large number of military and police forces in the
region. According to several residents, the internal conflicts and the
large military presence create an atmosphere of fear, to the extent
that some residents have abandoned farming their cornfields (milpas).
El Paraíso is also a historically violent area that remains
polarized along party lines. Mario Valdez, a PRD candidate for
Congress, has been detained and tortured and, on a separate occasion,
ambushed and shot in the face with a shotgun, leaving him blind in one
eye. More recently, three 'alleged' drug-traffickers were murdered in
a nearby village. Their bodies were subsequently burned and their
bones scattered. No one has been charged with the crime. The lack of
investigation and punishment of the perpetrators has increased
community concern about active vigilante groups. Moreover, community
members expressed a lack of faith in the judicial process, which
exacerbates the overall environment of fear and impunity.
The military was not visible in La Montaña or Costa Grande on
election day, though one of our delegates in Metlatonoc was told about
camps and road blocks which had been in place for up to three months
prior to election day.
Vote Buying, Coercion, and the Misuse of State Resources
Observers noted that both the PRI and PRD carried out vote buying and
coercion before the elections and on election day. In some cases, the
parties filed complaints. Testimony indicated that PRI militants had
been put on the defensive by heightened efforts by the IFE, Alianza
Cívica, human rights groups, and other NGOs to educate voters and
invite both national and international observers.
Government officials and party representatives used programs such as
Progresa and Procampo as conduits to send campaign literature to
program recipients in the Costa Grande. In San Gerónimo, PRI
campaign letters accompanied the Progresa payments to recipients three
weeks before the elections. School administrators and party
representatives pressured teachers in Aguas Blancas to recruit 10 PRI
voters, or risk losing their jobs. Officials used other types of
government programs to pressure voters. For example, in the
PRD-controlled community of Atoyaquillo, a PRD supporter, himself a
survivor of the Aguas Blancas massacre, brought in a medical brigade
on July 1. The brigade provided medical exams and planned to be doing
so in the area on election day as well.
Vote buying and coercion were also evident in La Montaña
region. The presence of large quantities of fertilizer in the towns of
Aquilpa, Tlatlauquitepec, Ayotoxtla, Zapotitlán, and Acatepa in the
week before the elections and on election day was particularly
flagrant. When observers inquired about the source of the fertilizer,
they were told that it had been ordered and paid for in February or
March. However, the fertilizer was not delivered until the week
preceding the elections, even though the planting season had ended by
that time. The fertilizer was not distributed by Procampo promoters,
but by the PRI governor and municipal presidents. The recipients paid
10 pesos per sack, half the market price. In Mixtecapa, a PRI local
official asked women to show him their voter credentials on election
day in order to receive a corn mill.
In Malinaltepec, a PRD-dominated community in La Montaña, the
disbursement of corn flour to women on election day through the
Temporary Workers Program prompted no protests by opposition
leaders. Mexican observers from the Human Rights Center of
Tlachinollan explained that the willingness of people to accept these
kinds of disbursements was a significant problem in the region. An IFE
official in Chilpancingo also pointed to the same endemic problem in
Guerrero's political culture; i.e., the extreme poverty that leads
people to accept politically conditioned handouts.
In Metlatonoc, observers heard numerous testimonies concerning gifts,
including food, drinks, handheld corn mills, fertilizer, hi-fi
equipment, money, blankets, and used clothes, made by PRI and PRD
party representatives as well as Congressional and Senatorial
candidates. The most blatant case of vote buying occurred in Cochoapa
el Grande where a local PRI deputy paid 120 pesos per vote in the days
before the elections.
Election Day Observations
On election day, observers reported cordiality and respect among the
IFE volunteers in La Montaña and Costa Grande. However, the voting
procedure generated confusion in several communities that led the
observers to question the training carried out by the IFE and the
system by which IFE volunteers had been chosen.
In El Cucuyachi, observers noted that 1) the booth opened two hours
late, 2) the voting curtains were hung like posters on the wall, 3)
the voting station volunteers did not use the indelible ink required
by the IFE, and 4) the voting station volunteers asked elderly people,
"who do you want to vote for" and then marked all three ballots
(presidential, senatorial and congressional) for the party that the
person indicated without distinguishing between the three different
offices. Observers noted that the volunteers did not pressure those
people who voted "at the table." In Zapotitlán, there was no
curtain on the front of the voting booth. Throughout La Montaña,
almost all polling places were located in front of the local
government buildings rather than in schools or private houses, thereby
associating the voting process with the state authorities.
In the remote Mixtec communities of Metlatonoc and Mixtecapa, voting
booths opened almost two hours late, and there were numerous
unforeseen substitutions of IFE volunteers who did not present
themselves on election day by people from the voting line. The
observers encountered similar confusion in the PRI-controlled town of
Xalpatlahuac, where none of the four IFE volunteers presented
themselves on election day. They were substituted by individuals
waiting in line to vote. In El Paraíso, the 'president' and
'secretary' of the IFE volunteers were absent, so the IFE examiners
had to assume their responsibilities. The person who then became the
head examiner was illiterate.
When observes asked IFE volunteers at the voting stations in La
Montaña whether they felt the training by the IFE had prepared them
for the elections, they usually answered in the affirmative. However,
many did not know how to deal with voters who possessed an electoral
credential but were not on the list. In the Tlacoapa, six voters who
were not on the list were allowed to vote. In Tetlacotepec, two people
with credentials were not on the list but were allowed to vote.
Observers found a large number of voting irregularities in the remote
PRD-governed municipality of Metlatonoc. Numerous mistakes appeared in
the lists. At the three voting stations observed, the IFE volunteers
were not all present. After additional volunteers were chosen from the
lines to fill the vacancies, the total number of volunteers varied
from three to six. Municipal officials had placed a large pile of
fertilizer bags conspicuously next to the voting station located in
front of the municipal building. The municipal police were guarding
the bags, and one of them was lying on top of the pile, looking down
on the voting station. A group of PRD supporters, including the
municipal president, walked around the voting station and were giving
directions to the IFE volunteers. Observers also noticed a PRI
candidate for Alternate Congressman and two PRI lawyers standing near
the voting stations throughout election day.
In other regions as well, observers witnessed both PRI and PRD party
officials and representatives attempting to influence the voting
process either through coercion or by maintaining an intimidating
presence at the voting station. In Xalpatlahuac, PRI officials
distributed water buckets, claiming that they were late Mother's Day
presents. In this instance the PAN and PRD representatives required
the IFE volunteers to file a complaint in the electoral document. In
Aguas Blancas, as the final ballot count began, the PRD representative
closely monitored the process. An individual who falsely represented
himself to observers as the local PRI president used intimidating and
aggressive language in an attempt to drive the PRD representative from
his position. The PRD representative defended his rights, however, and
was not intimidated.
Conclusions
Guerrero is the second poorest state in Mexico. It is also the
location of some of the most violent and endemic human rights abuses
in recent Mexican history. While both the pre-electoral delegation and
the electoral delegation heard testimonies concerning pressures and
irregularities leading up to the day of the elections, observers
witnessed no major criminal activity on election day
itself. Irregularities that observes did witness were mainly
continuations of fraudulent pre-electoral practices or the result of a
local political culture that reflects the marginalization to which a
vast number of rural Mexicans are subject. The political climate of
Guerrero, which has been racked by decades if not centuries of
internecine rivalries between local caciques, has left the rural,
poor, indigenous voter dependent on the vagaries of such power
struggles. The climate of fear, vote buying and coercion, and election
irregularities are simply symptoms of the conditions of poverty and
the political malaise found in the state. In the past widespread
violence and electoral irregularities were more commonplace. Electoral
counts were readjusted while the ballot boxes were being transported
by car or helicopter to the state capital, according to Florencio
Salazar Adame, a former high ranking PRI official. In order to combat
such traditions, it is essential that the autonomy granted to the IFE
be extended to the state and local levels. Legal reforms are also
necessary to give the IFE the power to investigate and prosecute
electoral irregularities. Most importantly the political climate of
fear and intimidation, tolerance of vote buying and coercion, and the
use of government resources to influence voters must be eliminated to
fully open the political process.
