FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Elections and Lesson from Mexico

by MARY TURCK

As the intensity of internal conflict mounts, Mexico awaits the verdict of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (variously known as the TEPJF or the Trife), and the streets of Mexico City are occupied by encampments of protesters demanding a full recount of the ballots in the July 2 presidential election, “vote by vote, precinct by precinct.” The constitution says the seven-judge Trife must complete its work by August 31 and must announce its decision by September 6.

At stake is the outcome of the July 2 presidential election, and perhaps much more. The Federal Election Institute (IFE) declared Felipe Calderón, candidate of the ruling National Action Party (PAN), the winner of the election by 243,000 votes, a razor-thin margin of the 41.5 million votes cast. Supporters of the Democratic Revolutionary Party’s Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) insist that he won the election, pointing to numerous instances of fraud. Among them: ballot boxes found in garbage dumps, boxes stuffed with additional ballots, tally sheets reporting totals that do not match the number of votes inside the box ­ the list goes on and on.

After two rallies of more than a million people each, AMLO supporters have settled in a well-organized, well-supplied encampment in downtown Mexico City, spilling out from the Zócalo (central square), blocking roads and disrupting daily life in the capital.

Despite evidence of widespread election irregularities, the Trife refused the call for a complete national recount, agreeing only to examine the results in 11,839 of the nation’s 130,000 precincts. That recount was completed in mid-August, though the results have not yet been publicly released. The Mexican daily La Jornada reported conflicting PRD and PAN claims about the results of the recount, with PRD insisting that the Trife had uncovered major problems and PAN dismissing the irregularities as “errorcitos.” But La Jornada’s website features videos showing violated ballot boxes and other evidence of fraud from sites across the country. Narco News Bulletin, which has closely followed the election and post-election results, claims it has received information that the Trife’s partial recount showed irregularities sufficient to reverse the results of the election. (Mexico’s Partial Vote Recount Confirms Massive and Systematic Election Fraud, Narco News Bulletin, 8/15/06)

The Trife has several options. First, it could annul the results in specific precincts, based on its examinations. Many results are tainted by “taqueo” (stuffing ballot boxes as if they were tacos) or by “saqueo” (theft of ballots.) In either case, determining the true count for the precinct is impossible, so annulment is the remedy. Annulments of even a portion of the 11,000 recounted precincts could reverse the margin of victory, giving the presidency to AMLO.

Second, the Trife could annul the entire election. It has annulled local and even gubernatorial elections in the past. If it annulled the entire election, Congress would select an interim president to govern and new elections would be scheduled within two years. Since Congress is effectively controlled by the governing PAN party, with the support of the deposed and discredited Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), a two-year delay in elections would mean two more years of PAN rule.

Whatever decision the Trife takes, they are not the only actors on the scene. López Obrador has pledged “civil resistance” if the Trife declares in favor of Calderón, beginning on September 1 when President Vicente Fox gives his annual State of the Union address to Congress.

As in the U.S. presidential election in 2000, it seems clear that various kinds of election irregularities (or outright fraud) resulted in the initial award of victory. Unlike the Democratic candidate and party in the United States in 2004, AMLO and his supporters have refused to yield, instead pledging to escalate their campaign of nonviolent civil resistance and to prevent a Calderón presidency.

While the magnitude of Mexico’s electoral fraud may be even greater than the “irregularities” of Florida in 2000, that alone does not explain the militance of the resistance. “Mexico has a revolution every hundred years,” say many voices from the street. In 1810, the War of Independence began. The Mexican Revolution came in 1910. Today, millions of voices are raised in protest, peaceful resistance fills the streets of the capital with encampments, the Zapatistas’ La Otra Campaña marches through the countryside and, in Oaxaca, teachers lead a popular revolt against a corrupt and abusive governor.

This may be what a revolution looks like. It may be what democracy looks like. And it may be ­ in a lesson to the citizens of the neighbor to the north ­ what principled resistance to corrupt abuse of power and theft of elections looks like.

MARY TURCK is the editor of Connection to the Americas and WWW.AMERICAS.ORG, for the Resource Center of the Americas, where this article first appeared. She can be reached at: mturck@americas.org

 

 

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
February 17, 2017
Friday - Sunday
David Price
Rogue Elephant Rising: The CIA as Kingslayer
Matthew Stevenson
Is Trump the Worst President Ever?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Flynn?
John Wight
Brexit and Trump: Why Right is Not the New Left
Diana Johnstone
France: Another Ghastly Presidential Election Campaign; the Deep State Rises to the Surface
Neve Gordon
Trump’s One-State Option
Roger Harris
Emperor Trump Has No Clothes: Time to Organize!
Joan Roelofs
What Else is Wrong with Globalization
Andrew Levine
Why Trump’s Muslim Travel Ban?
Mike Whitney
Blood in the Water: the Trump Revolution Ends in a Whimper
Vijay Prashad
Trump, Turmoil and Resistance
Ron Jacobs
U.S. Imperial War Personified
David Swanson
Can the Climate Survive Adherence to War and Partisanship?
Andre Vltchek
Governor of Jakarta: Get Re-elected or Die!
Patrick Cockburn
The Coming Destruction of Mosul
Norman Pollack
Self-Devouring Reaction: Governmental Impasse
Steve Horn
What Do a Louisiana Pipeline Explosion and Dakota Access Pipeline Have in Common? Phillips 66
Brian Saady
Why Corporations are Too Big to Jail in the Drug War
Graham Peebles
Ethiopia: Peaceful Protest to Armed Uprising
Luke Meyer
The Case of Tony: Inside a Lifer Hearing
Binoy Kampmark
Adolf, The Donald and History
Robert Koehler
The Great American Awakening
Murray Dobbin
Canadians at Odds With Their Government on Israel
Fariborz Saremi
A Whole New World?
Joyce Nelson
Japan’s Abe, Trump & Illegal Leaks
Christopher Brauchli
Trump 1, Tillerson 0
Yves Engler
Is This Hate Speech?
Dan Bacher
Trump Administration Exempts Three CA Oil Fields From Water Protection Rule at Jerry Brown’s Request
Richard Klin
Solid Gold
Melissa Garriga
Anti-Abortion and Anti-Fascist Movements: More in Common Than Meets the Eye
Thomas Knapp
The Absurd Consequences of a “Right to Privacy”
W. T. Whitney
The Fate of Prisoner Simón Trinidad, as Seen by His U. S. Lawyer
Brian Platt
Don’t Just Oppose ICE Raids, Tear Down the Whole Racist Immigration Enforcement Regime
Paul Cantor
Refugee: the Compassionate Mind of Egon Schwartz
Norman Richmond
The Black Radical Tradition in Canada
Barton Kunstler
Rallying Against the Totalitarian Specter
Judith Deutsch
Militarism:  Revolutionary Mothering and Rosie the Riveter
Nyla Ali Khan
Kashmir Evoked a Lot More International Attention in the 1950s Than It Does Now
Adam Phillips
There Isn’t Any There There
Louis Proyect
Steinbeck’s Red Devils
Randy Shields
Left Coast Date: the Dating Site for the ORWACA Tribe
Charles R. Larson
Review: Bill Hayes’ “Insomniac City”
David Yearsley
White Supremacy and Music Theory
February 16, 2017
Peter Gaffney
The Rage of Caliban: Identity Politics, the Travel Ban, and the Shifting Ideological Framework of the Resistance
Ramzy Baroud
Farewell to Doublespeak: Israel’s Terrifying Vision for the Future
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail