Thank you.
To start, from February 3 to 15 of this year, I participated in an international pre-electoral observation mission to Colombia. As part of a 22-person group, we carried out observation in four of Colombia's departments: Cordoba, Valle del Cauca, Antioquia, and Santander, as well as the capital city of Bogota. The regional observation teams were made up of professionals from different countries, organizations, and disciplines to assure a broad and multi-faceted perspective to the mission.
I have previously observed pre-electoral conditions and election day voting in Mexico, the United States, and Ethiopia with the Carter Center. I offer this testimony as important consideration for the committee in regard to the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement, as the existence of a strong and healthy democratic system should be a key consideration of the committee and the deliberation on the CCFTA. As with the question of whether to recommend ratification of the CCFTA without a human rights impact assessment, we are convinced that the exercise of democracy cannot be understood as an isolated event on the day of voting.
Our methodology for observation was designed to be as broad and inclusive as possible. We met with leaders of all major political parties, representatives of civil society organizations, local, state, and national government officials, electoral authorities, officials charged with electoral oversight on municipal and departmental levels, journalists, and members of the media. We also sought out direct contact with citizens, organized through the church, civic groups, unions, indigenous and Afro-Colombian groups, the LGBT community, displaced persons, feminists, and others.
The purpose of the mission was to gather information regarding the conditions surrounding the March 14 congressional elections, also relevant to the presidential elections at the end of this month. International standards stipulate that valid electoral observation cannot take place without a study of pre-electoral conditions, as these constitute the often invisible but determinant backdrop to voting on election day. In a situation of internal conflict, the presence of illegal armed groups, widespread violence and violation of human rights, and internal displacement, as in Colombia, this is especially critical.
In March of this year, each of your offices received a copy of the mission's final report. I'll use the bulk of my time to highlight our key concerns, with only a few of the examples that are covered in the report.
Our first concern relates to the influence of armed groups—paramilitaries and narco-traffickers—on the electoral process. The influence of narco-traffickers and armed actors on the electoral process in certain parts of Colombia is, by all indications, significant and alarming. Their forceful interventions are directly related to the ultimate objective of becoming the de facto political authority in various parts of the country. It is certain in places where these groups have been active or allowed to operate with impunity that the legitimacy of both the electoral process and the candidates elected during those campaigns has not been and will not be trusted by the people. High-profile scandals, many of which this committee has already heard about, further erode the people's sense that the government and its representatives exist to serve them and address their needs.
According to community leaders and organizations based in various parts of the country, the government bears a large portion of responsibility for the recent expansion of the armed banditry and violence that is evident in all areas of social life, including electoral politics. Evidence from numerous sources indicate narco-traffickers and armed actors in and around Buenaventura are heavily involved with all aspects of electoral politics, including handing out gifts and bribing and intimidating candidates and the electorate, monitoring polling places, and directly interfering with poll workers and ballots after the voting process has ended.
Our second concern is about electoral fraud and electoral crimes. In our meeting with Colombian citizens, elected officials, and representatives of political parties, the following complaints were registered, which constitute interference with the free exercise of voting. To begin, in all regions there were reports that official poll watchers have been bought by parties to promote their interests and either turn a blind eye to irregularities or actively participate in them. These include activities such as marking ballots in favour of their candidate, falsifying vote counts, or annulling ballots that were already marked for opposing candidates. This level of collusion is essential to operationalize many of the additional strategies I'll talk about here.
The buying and selling of votes is the most common complaint received by the regional delegations in the mission. Citizens in Tierra Alta, Montelibano, and Monteria reported being offered anything from bags of cement and roofing materials to the construction of houses, to cash payments of 20,000 to 50,000 pesos, which is between $10 and $25 Canadian, per vote.
Typically, voters and representatives of opposition parties reported that vote buying from various political parties would require confirmation that a citizen had voted as agreed before paying the full amount. There are various methods for ensuring this, including taking photos of the marked ballot with a camera phone or just a regular camera, or using carbon copies to reproduce the vote.
The misuse of voter ID cards was commonly cited as a method of voter fraud in all regions. ID cards from people from other voting districts, counterfeit cards, or even cards from deceased persons have been used.
In the mission's final report we also discuss and cite examples of election observers being removed or obstructed from observing election day activities and report impediments to the right to vote as related by witnesses we interviewed.
In the final report we also discuss testimony of the existence of illegal electoral campaign financing practices, especially originating in drug trafficking, which I will not elaborate on here in order to respect the time guidelines.
Third, there is the use of government programs to influence election results.
Acción Social is the agency that channels national and international resources to social programs under the presidency and that attends to the needs of vulnerable sectors of the population affected by poverty, violence, and drug trafficking.
Among the different programs that have been developed under Acción Social, the Familias en Acción program is the most recognized at the national level and has the broadest coverage, serving nearly three million families. The program consists of providing conditioned subsidies to mothers and poor families and/or families displaced by violent conflict, on the condition that they fulfill commitments such as sending their children to school, regularly attending health evaluations, etc.
After analyzing the results of all four regional delegations, we were impressed to find that a wide variety of sources coincided in affirming that candidates of the ruling Partido de la U and other parties in the governing coalition have attended meetings with beneficiaries of the social programs, at which they stated that if the beneficiaries do not support them with their votes, the subsidies they receive from the president will end.
It is of grave concern that there appears to be no separation between the presidential figure and the needed government programs that attend to displaced persons and other vulnerable sectors, and from reports we've received, there's an alarmingly high rate of manipulation and misinformation on the part of regional politicians regarding Familias en Acción. This practice leaves open the possibility of manipulation of subsidies and the restriction of the voters' right to choose freely who to vote for.
Before ending, I want to point your attention to the OAS election report released on May 6 after the March 16 congressional elections; it highlights similar findings in regard to vote-buying and lack of citizen participation and understanding of the democratic process during that congressional election. Reports commending the fact that these elections were the most peaceful in years indicate that the bar for Colombian democracy is pretty low, when the absence of bombings at polling centres or of assassinations of candidates is a marker of a successful election.
Pre-electoral observation includes a multitude of factors that run from daily participation in decision-making by a free and informed citizenry to defence of national sovereignty at the geopolitical level. For this reason, we strongly believe that an in-depth analysis of the social and political conditions in the country is indispensable, since these constitute the often invisible but crucial backdrop to the electoral process.
I would offer that in consideration of the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement, the human rights impact assessment proposed by this committee is an essential step to understanding the context on the ground in Colombia.
In closing, I thank you for the opportunity to make this presentation. I would say in addition that I feel strongly that the committee needs to continue to hear from the outstanding list of witnesses who have requested to testify in the coming weeks.
Thank you.
