Electoral Dirty
Tricks Via the Internet in Mexico
By Kenneth
Emmond
Anyone who follows Mexico’s election campaign
knows that the front-running presidential candidates have abandoned issues in favor of personal attacks.
Slander, defamation, and innuendo have come to the
fore with such vengeance that an observer from Planet Zog might think the main issue is to elect the least dishonest pretender
to the presidential sash.
Behind the scenes, where the dirtiest tricks have
always been played, it worsens far beyond the realm of finger-pointing and questionable television spots.
Technology has created a minefield for guardians
of the fair vote, who square off against those who care only about manipulating votes without regard for rules or honor –
of whom there are representatives in all major parties.
A simple example is the exploitation of the poor
and uneducated. Vote buying was always an integral part of Mexican election campaigns. To mitigate the temptation to take
the money and vote as they pleased, those who received cash for votes were told the party would know how they voted, though
it wasn’t explained how.
Today the uneducated are told that the party has
satellites overhead that monitor voting, and a betrayal vote will bring dire consequences to the voter and his family.
The Internet and message-receiving cell phones have
registered at least 7 million anonymous messages saying things like, “Lopez Obrador is a danger to Mexico.” No
one is sure who does this, but a finger of suspicion points at the National Action Party (PAN), whose candidate, Felipe Calderon,
is running neck-and-neck with Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, the former Mexico City mayor.
This type of electoral crime is easy to commit and
extremely hard to prosecute.
In its 2005 annual report, the Special Prosecutor
for Electoral Crimes (FEPADE) admitted, “The political and social conditions that motivated incorporation of electoral
crimes in the criminal code in 1990 are not the same as those of today…. The current system of federal electoral justice
has been overwhelmed by the reality of political conflicts, and because of this we have failed to fulfill some of the social
expectations of democratic processes.”
Maria de los Angeles Fromow, the head of FEPADE,
said recently, “When we speak of new ways to commit a crime we are talking about crimes on the Internet.”
At a news conference last week, she said FEPADE has
received no fewer than 240 complaints about electoral cheating – so far.
“We receive complaints every day from all over
the country,” Fromow said. “They range from vote-buying to coercion and public servants who use public resources.”
This represents a tremendous judicial challenge –
and an equally tremendous indictment on the tactics used by ambitious politicians. It’s a testament to how far Mexico’s
politics have yet to go before they are truly democratic.
Many of today’s vote-manipulating tactics are
high technology, but tried and true methods are still used – though they have spread from the Institutional Revolutionary
Party (PRI) to everyone with a realistic chance of winning.
Companies are told that they must contribute generously
to a party if they are to expect post-election government contracts. Can the vague laws forbidding this practice be invoked
to bring justice to perpetrators who do this in private conversations?
The number and variety of dirty tricks that can be
played is limited only by the imaginations of campaign managers.
Discouraging though this may be it still represents
progress.
Not so many elections ago most of this legerdemain
took place without being reported or publicized, and with no possibility of redress. Mexicans suspected that all was not as
it should be, but they didn’t know exactly how votes were manipulated. This peaked in 1988, when a mysterious “computer
crash” during vote counting ended the hopes of Cuauhtemoc Cardenas to topple the PRI and defeat its presidential candidate,
Carlos Salinas de Gortari.
In the 1990s two electoral institutions were set
up that are not beholden to the administration – the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), which manages the electoral
process, and FEPADE. That was a major step toward fair elections.
FEPADE won’t catch all of the miscreants and
it won’t always win in court, but its independence and its ability to report electoral crimes signify that Mexico is
indeed moving closer to democracy. It’s getting harder and harder to cheat.
President Vicente Fox claims that this election will
be the cleanest in history. Despite the gutter level of candidates’ campaigning and the sleight-of-hand that still goes
on in back rooms, it probably will be.
——————————
Kenneth Emmond, an economist,
market consultant and journalist who has lived in Mexico since 1995, is also a columnist with MexiData.info. He can be reached via e-mail at Kemmond00@yahoo.com.
