Venezuela--2012 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Audit Report (Revised April 15, 2013)

2012 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Audit of the
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela‘s Federal
Electoral System
Electoral Fairness Audit Completed October 1, 2012
Revised as of April 15, 2013
Executive Summary
The Venezuelan federal electoral system is very satisfactory as determined by the overall
audit score of 78.83 percent (out of 100 percent). The FDA auditors measured
1) one unsatisfactory passing score for legislation pertaining to electoral finance
(52.5 percent);
2) one very satisfactory score for legislation pertaining to candidates and parties
(77.9 percent);
3) two exceptional scores for legislation pertaining to media election coverage
(100 percent) and voters (84.9 percent).
The FDA audit focused on 52 variables, and it utilized matrices, financial analysis, and
scoring scales. The most notable areas of the system are Venezuela‘s commitment to
complete and balanced election coverage, thereby supporting a fair playing field for
candidates and parties, and a commitment to people‘s right to vote and the act of voting
through various innovative and progressive measures. However, electoral finances of
candidates and parties are only transparent to the state, and there are no direct caps on
campaign contributions and no direct limits on expenditures. The lack of public financial
transparency creates the potential for pro-government parties to pursue corrupt financial
practices and leave anti-government parties subject to unjust assessments of their finances
including targeting their contributors. The lack of caps and limits on electoral finances may
create an unfair playing field in the realms of billboards, flyers, posters, and campaign
events, because these media are not covered by the complete and balanced coverage
requirement. The FDA has no evidence of electoral financial wrongdoing, as does no one
else, because only the Venezuelan State through the National Electoral Council is privy to
party finances. The FDA recommends reforms that will bring about public electoral finance
transparency, caps on campaign contributions and limits on campaign expenditures. If
implemented these reforms would make the Venezuelan electoral system a model for the
rest of the world. As it stands, these limitations have the potential to allow for corrupt
financial practices and create unfair playing fields for candidates and parties.
Overall the FDA recommends that the public get continuously and actively involved with
the government legislative process and implementation if they want to protect and advance
their democratic voice, and create a society of their choosing.

Foundation for Democratic Advancement | 2012 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Venezuela April 15, 2013 R1 Page 2 of 70
Prepared By
Mr. Stephen Garvey, Executive Director Foundation for Democratic Advancement, Bachelor of
Arts in Political Science, University of British Columbia and Master of Philosophy in
Environment and Development, University of Cambridge.
Purpose of the Venezuelan Electoral Fairness Audit
The purpose of the Foundation for Democratic Advancement (FDA)‘s electoral fairness audit
(the ―Audit‖) is to determine a comprehensive grade for electoral fairness in Venezuela at the
executive and assembly levels of government. This Audit is an extension of the FDA‘s global
audit of electoral fairness involving all countries that hold political elections. The purpose of the
global audit is to quantify electoral fairness, establish benchmarks for electoral fairness, identify
areas of democratic advancement and progression, and encourage democracy reform where
needed.
The goal of the FDA's Venezuela report is to give the people of Venezuela and other
stakeholders an informed, objective perspective of the Venezuelan federal electoral system and
provide recommendations for reform. Venezuelans may want to use this information as a way to
help determine their electoral choices. The release of the FDA‘s revised Venezuela report just
prior to the 2013 Venezuelan Presidential Election coincides with this initiative.
The views in this electoral fairness audit are the views of the FDA only. The FDA‘s members are
in no way affiliated with the National Electoral Council or any of the Venezuelan registered/non-
registered political parties. The Audit is an independent assessment based on objectivity,
transparency and non-partisanship. The FDA assumes no responsibility or liability for any errors
in the measurement and calculation of its audit results or inaccuracies in its research of relevant
Venezuelan legislation.
About the Foundation for Democratic Advancement
The Foundation for Democratic Advancement (FDA) is an international independent, non-
partisan democracy organization. The FDA‘s mission is
to measure, study, and communicate the impact of government processes on a free and
democratic society.
Overall, the FDA works
1. to ensure that people become more knowledgeable about the outcomes of
government processes and can then make decisions that are more informed;
2. to get people involved in monitoring government processes at all levels of
government and in providing sound, practical, and effective suggestions. (For more
information on the FDA visit: www.democracychange.org)

To ensure its objectivity and independence, the FDA does not conduct privately paid research.
However, if you or your organization has an important research idea or are aware of an important
issue on government processes, the FDA is available to listen to your idea or issue and possibly
help raise public awareness by initiating and leading change through report research and
analysis. Please contact the FDA at (403) 669-8132 or email us at info@democracychange.org
for more information.
An online version of this report can be found at: www.democracychange.org
For further information and/or comments on this report please contact Mr. Stephen Garvey at
stephen.garvey@democracychange.org

Table of Contents
Introduction 5
How to Read the Report 7
Chapter 1: Electoral Finance Audit Results 11
Analysis 19
Chapter 2: Media Election Content Audit Results 21
Analysis 28
Chapter 3: Candidates and Parties Audit Results 30
Analysis 42
Chapter 4: Voters Audit Results 43
Analysis 52
Chapter 5: Overall Audit Results 53
Chapter 6: Analysis 54
Chapter 7: Conclusion and Recommendations 57
References 60
Appendix: Research Methodology 64
FDA Research and Audit Teams and Observers 69

Introduction
The FDA based its audit of Venezuela‘s federal electoral legislation on non-partisanship and
objectivity.
The audit process entails three major components:
1) Research of Venezuela's federal electoral legislation and any related legislation and
documents.
2) Audit of the legislation and research findings based on audit team consensus, and the FDA‘s
matrices, financial spreadsheets, and scoring scales.
3) Analysis of findings.
The FDA based the matrix scoring scales on the fundamental democratic principles of legislative
neutrality, political freedom, and political fairness. In addition, it based the scales on the
comparative impact of variables on democracy. For example, if there is no electoral finance
transparency then this result will affect other variables such as caps on contributions. Without
financial transparency, it is near impossible to enforce electoral finance laws, which prevent and
uncover electoral finance wrongdoing. Consequently, according to the FDA‘s matrices, zero
financial transparency will lower the score for caps on contributions.
The FDA‘s research component is objective as it is simply a compilation of the legislative
information and financial data for the Venezuelan system and any related findings based in fact
and sound empirical research.
The FDA‘s audit component is both objective and subjective. It is objective when determining
yes and no facts, such as does country ―A‖ have caps on electoral contributions—yes or no? It is
subjective because of the predetermined scores for each audit section, and the scores determined
for each section. The FDA acknowledges that there is no absolute scoring system or
determination of scores.
The FDA minimizes subjectivity through non-partisanship and basing each score on facts,
research findings, financial calculations, and team audit consensus. It bases the scoring scales for
each section of the audit on consensus of the FDA auditors and survey results of relevant
persons. In addition, the application of core democratic concepts such as electoral legislative
neutrality, political freedom, and political fairness, and the comparative impact of variables on
democracy inform the scoring scales. Finally, the FDA requires a minimum quorum of five
experienced auditors during audit sessions. For further discussion of the FDA methodology,
please see the Appendix on page 63.

The FDA is a registered non-profit corporation, and therefore it cannot issue tax-deductible
receipts. In addition, the FDA is the sole funder of this report. As a policy to maintain its
independence and objectivity, the FDA does not conduct privately funded research projects. The
FDA relies on donations. If you value this report, please consider donating to the Foundation
for Democratic Advancement to help cover the costs of producing this report and communicating
its content to the stakeholders, and to continue its work on Venezuela.
“Democracy is not a spectator sport.”
- Marian Edelman

How to Read the Report
Chapters 1 to 4 focus on the four sections of the FDA‘s audit of the Venezuelan federal electoral
system. These chapters are formatted in the following manner
1) Chapter summary and table of audit results for the section.
2) Audit questions, legislative research and audit findings on each audit subsection.
3) Analysis of audit measurements and findings for the section.
Chapter 6, ‗Overall Analysis‘, pertains to the measurements and findings from all four audit
sections.
Definition of Key Terms
The Foundation for Democratic Advancement characterized the following definitions
Candidates and parties (audit section three)
The opportunity and ability of candidates and parties to campaign in the public domain for
elected positions. This opportunity and ability occur before, during, and after an election period.
Candidates and parties may involve election content of media, electoral finance, and voters (as
defined below). In the terms of the FDA electoral fairness audit, which focuses on electoral
process, candidates and parties includes:
1) Registrations requirements for candidates and parties.
2) Laws on candidates‘ and parties‘ access to media and reasonable opportunity to take
advantage of the access.
3) Regulations on access to major debates.
4) Electoral complaints process for candidates and parties
In the FDA electoral fairness audit, candidates and parties only encompasses laws, regulations,
procedures etc. that affect the influence of candidates and parties. For example, candidates and
parties does not encompass laws on electoral complaints by voters nor does it encompass laws on
voter assistance at polling booths.
Electoral fairness
The impartiality and equality of election law before, during, and after an election period. In the
context of the audit, electoral fairness involves concepts relating to election content in the media,
candidates and parties, electoral finance, and voters. In particular, this includes evaluating
impartiality and balance of political content in the media, equitable opportunity and ability for
registered candidates and parties to influence voters and government, equitable electoral finance
laws, and equitable opportunity and ability for voters to voice political views and/or influence
the outcome of an election.

Electoral fairness does not allow bias through, for example, legislation that gives a distinct
electoral advantage to one registered party over another, or laws that allow equitable access to
media without facilitating equal opportunity to take advantage of this access. In contrast,
electoral fairness would include a broad, balanced diffusion of electoral propaganda by
registered political parties during the campaign period, equal campaign finances (beyond equal
expenditure limits) for all registered parties according to the number of candidates endorsed, and
the registration of parties based on reasonable popular support (rather than financial deposit or
unreasonable popular support).
Electoral fairness in any democratic process must include an equal playing field for registered
parties and candidates, distinguishable by voters according to a clear political platform, and a
broad and balanced political discourse in where information about electoral choices are clear and
available to the voting public.
Electoral finance (audit section one)
Electoral finance laws applied to registered candidates and parties before, during, and after an
election period. Electoral finance also encompasses campaign finance which is restricted to the
campaign period.
In the context of the FDA electoral fairness audit, electoral finance includes:
1) Caps on electoral contributions (or the lack of).
2) Caps on candidate and party electoral expenditures (or the lack of).
3) Procedures for financial disclosure and reporting of candidate and party electoral finance.
4) Procedures for the handling of electoral contributions by registered candidates and parties.
Electoral finance does not include non-financial laws, regulations, procedures etc. such as those
relating to candidate and party access to media, civil rights laws such as freedom of speech and
assembly, rules on right of reply in the media, laws on the election content of media, and laws on
voter assistance.
Special interest-based democracy
A system in where either individual or corporate interests dictate government action and factions
with the most economic and political power in society influence policies and legislation. The
electoral system is set up to allow special and minority interests to impact election outcomes
primarily through electoral finance and media access and exposure.
People-based democracy
A system where power is invested in the people and the population as a whole influence
government policies and legislation. The electoral system is set up in a fair and equitable manner
so that all citizens, within reason, have an opportunity to influence the election outcome to the
same degree.

Media election coverage (audit section two)
The political content of radio and television broadcasters, the printed press, and online news
media such as news sites before, during, and after an election period. This content may include
news stories, editorials, articles, programs, and group analysis and discussion. It does not include
electoral advertisements by candidates, parties, and third parties. Electoral advertisements by
candidates and parties are included in candidates and parties, and electoral advertisements by
third parties are included in voters and electoral finance.
In the context of FDA electoral fairness audit, election content of media includes:
1) Registration requirements for television and radio broadcast companies and press companies.
2) Laws on the ownership concentration of media (or the lack of).
3) Laws on the election content of media before, during, and after a campaign period.
4) Laws on freedom of the press and broadcasters.
The FDA defines ―balance‖ in the media as having equal political content of all registered
political parties presented during the election period. Voters should receive balanced information
on all registered candidates and parties in order for election outcomes to reflect the will of the
majority. The FDA does not support the idea that incumbent or previously successful parties
should be favoured in media coverage in a current election as this could create bias based merely
on past results, and potentially weaken the process of capturing the will of the people in the
present. In addition, the FDA does not support unlimited freedom of broadcast and press media
and believes there is a misleading connection between this and democracy. The purpose of
democratic elections is to capture as accurately as possible the will of the people from districts.
Broad and balanced electoral discourse creates an informed electorate and supports the will of
the people. The FDA concedes that media ownership concentration laws aimed to produce
pluralistic ownership could cancel out any imbalance in political content and provide equitable
coverage of all registered political parties.
Voters (audit section four)
The citizens who are eligible to vote and their opportunity to express that vote and a political
voice through articles, letters to editors, blogs, advertisements, spoken word etc. in the public
domain. Voter influence applies to the period before, during, and after an election.
In the context of the FDA electoral fairness audit, which focuses on electoral process, voters
include:
1) Laws and regulations on freedom of speech and assembly.
2) Laws on the registration requirements for voters.
3) Laws on voter assistance at the polling booth.
4) Laws on the inclusion of minorities in the electoral process.
In the context of the FDA electoral fairness audit, voters may be impacted by the election content
of media, and candidates and parties and electoral finance law. For example, no cap on
contributions to candidates and parties will affect voters because no cap favors voters with more

financial wealth, and thereby the lack of cap creates electoral inequity and imbalance among
voters.

Chapter One: Electoral Finance
This chapter focuses on Venezuelan electoral finance laws and the FDA's audit of them in terms
of electoral fairness. Based on the political concepts of egalitarianism and political liberalism,
the FDA team audits electoral finance laws according to their equity for registered candidates,
parties, and voters (see Appendix on page 63 for further explanation). The FDA team audits from
the standpoint of a people's representative democracy. Table 1 below shows the FDA‘s audit
variables, their corresponding audit weights, and results:
Table 1
Electoral Finance
Section Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
Audit
Results
% Results
Electoral Finance
Transparency
20% 2.0 0.0 0.0%
Contributions to
Candidates & Parties
15% 1.5 1.0 100%
Caps on Contributions
to Candidates & Parties
20% 2.0 1.25 62.5%
Campaign Expenditure
Limits
22.5% 2.25 1.0 44.44%
Caps on Third-party
Expenditures
12.5% 1.25 1.0 80%
Legislative Process 10% 1.0 1.0 100%
Variables from Other
Sections
n/a n/a n/a n/a
Total 100% 10 5.25 52.5%
The FDA chose these subsections because they represent core areas of electoral finance. The
audit of electoral finance includes examination of Venezuelan electoral finance legislation and
the application of legislative research to the FDA matrices. Matrix scoring is based on an overall
score of 0 to 10 out of 10.
What follows are the audit questions, legislative research, and audit findings:
Electoral Finance Transparency
Audit Questions
1) Are candidate and party finances transparent to the public?
2) Are candidate and party finances transparent to candidates and parties only?
3) Are candidate and party finances transparent to the government only?

Legislative Research
The National Electoral Council has the authority to set guidelines for financing and political-
electoral advertising and impose penalties when these guidelines are not followed (Election
Power Act, Article 33 (20) and Venezuela Constitution, Article 293(3)).
The National Electoral Council has the authority to determine and regulate all matters pertaining
to the financing of national election campaigns (Election Power Act, Article 33 (23)).
The National Electoral Council has the authority to ensure compliance with laws on financing of
election campaigns of political organizations, constituency, civic groups, or citizens and
independent candidates (Election Power Act, Article 33 (24)).
The Committee on Political Participation and Financing has the authority to control, regulate,
and investigate funds for political purposes and electoral campaign financing (Election Power
Act, Article 64).
Representatives of candidates and the candidates must report in writing to the National Electoral
Council the name, identity card or Tax Information Registry of the persons authorized to pay for
propaganda (Election Law, Article 74).
The state requires political parties to document and account for their income and investments.
Political parties must submit a general ledger or inventory book to the state and must retain those
records for five years (Law on Political Parties, Article 25(6).
The state requires political organizations, voter groups, indigenous communities and
organizations, and candidates to register in the Electoral Registration Financial Information
within five days before the start of an election campaign (Election Resolution No. 100304-0043,
Article 258).
organizations, and candidates to register through the System Automated information of income,
expenses, receivables and accounts payable, within the first five (5) calendar days to the end of
each month, and be activated 5 days prior to the start of an election campaign (Election
Resolution No. 100304-0043, Article 259).
The Commission of Political Participation and Finance may conduct financial research, analysis
of accounting, and financial audits to ensure compliance financial regulations (Election
organizations, and candidates to maintain a system of accounting that records transactions, and
preparation of economic and financial statements that conform to accepted accounting principles
(Election Resolution No. 100304-0043, Article 265).
organizations, and candidates to use up to two designated bank accounts, and these accounts

should be consistent with the accounting books and information transmitted through automated
accountability (Election Resolution No. 100304-0043, Article 269).
organizations, and candidates to perform monthly updates to the automated system of
accountability accounts within the first 5 days to maturity of each month (Election Resolution
No. 100304-0043 Article 272).
Within 60 days following an election, the state requires political organizations, voter groups,
indigenous communities and organizations, and candidates to submit their final campaign
funding reports through the automated system of accountability accounts (Election Resolution
No. 100304-0043, Article 273).
The Commission on Political Participation and Financing will conduct random audits on
campaign funds of parties, organizations, or individuals (Election Resolution No. 100304-0043,
Article 276).
The National Electoral Council may not disclose financial figures on candidates, parties etc.
during the campaign, but releases them after the campaign period (Vergara, 2012).
The FDA researchers found no legislation that requires the National Electoral Council to release
publicly financial information on candidates and parties.
Audit Finding
Candidate and party finances are only transparent to the state.
Contributions to Candidates and Parties
Audit Questions
1) Are contributions restricted to citizens?
2) Are contributions disallowed by foreigners, public institutions, and charities?
3) Are anonymous contributions set at a reasonable level?
Legislative Findings
The state disallows anonymous contributions (General Election Regulation, Article 257(1)).
The state disallows contributions from public agencies, public foundations receiving funds from
governments or foreign agencies, and foreign companies headquartered abroad (Election
The state disallows contributions from foreign donors and companies contracted to provide
public services (Vergara, 2012).

The state disallows election propaganda to be funded from abroad (Election Law, Article
75(14)).
The FDA researchers found no laws that restrict contributions to individuals.
Audit Findings
Venezuelan citizens and corporations can both make electoral contributions. The state disallows
foreigners, and Venezuelan public institutions and charities from making electoral contributions.
The state disallows anonymous contributions, and thereby eliminates the possibility of illegal
anonymous contributions.
Caps on Contributions to Candidates and Parties
Audit Questions
1) Are the caps on candidates' and parties' contributions reflective of per capita disposable
income level?
2) Are the caps on candidates own contributions reflective of per capita disposable income
level?
Research
As of October 2011, there are 18,022,710 Venezuelans on the voters list (GDP per capita
(current US$), 2012a). The 2011 estimated GDP per capita income for Venezuela is $12,400
(USD) (GDP per capita (current US$), 2012a). The FDA Researchers were unable to find per
capita disposable income data on Venezuela.
The FDA researchers found indirect restrictions on contributions through a requirement for
―complete and balanced‖ election propaganda and coverage. These restrictions help offset no
legislated cap on contributions and no limit on expenditures.
The National Electoral Council may finance in part or in full the diffusion of electoral
propaganda in the media of radio, television, or print in accordance with regulations including
ensuring complete and balanced coverage (Election Law, Article 78).
Public and private media election coverage will be complete and balanced without distorting the
reality of the campaign. The media must observe ―rigorous‖ balance in terms of space and time
devoted to information on candidates and parties (Election Law, Article 81).
The state disallows public and private media from making their own election propaganda aimed
at encouraging or persuading the electorate to vote for a particular candidate or party or against
particular candidate or party (Election Law, Article 79).

Each candidate is limited to a half page print ad in national newspapers per day, and broadcast
ads are limited to 3 minutes per day (National Electoral Council Investigates Campaigns, 2012).
Radio ads are limited to 4 minutes per day (Walser, 2012).
The FDA researchers found no direct restrictions on contribution amounts.
The FDA researchers found no direct restrictions on personal contributions by candidates.
Audit Findings
The National Electoral Council has the authority to finance in part or in full the diffusion of
electoral propaganda in the media of radio, television, or print in accordance with regulations
that require complete and balanced election coverage. In addition, each candidate is limited to a
half page print ad in national newspapers per day, broadcast ads are limited to 3 minutes per day,
and radio ads are limited to 4 minutes per day. Therefore, FDA auditors concluded that there are
in effect indirect caps on contributions to candidates and parties and allowed the scores to reflect
this. The indirect cap does not include billboards, flyers, posters, and campaign events. The FDA
auditors determined that a cap of 3 minutes per day for the 97-day campaign period is not
reflective of per capita gross income of $12,400. For example, if a 3-minute ad costs $250,000,
then that works out to $24,250,000 (USD) in advertisement expense over the campaign period,
and that does not include ads in other media sectors. The FDA auditors determine that the
electoral subsidies through National Electoral Council do not directly create a level playing field,
because they do not include billboards, flyers, posters, and campaign events, and it is unknown
to what extent the National Electoral Council disseminates election propaganda for the distinct
purpose of promoting equality among parties.
Campaign Expenditure Limits
Audit Questions
1) If there are campaign expenditure limits on candidates and parties, are they set high enough
and still reasonably attainable by all registered candidates and parties?
2) If there are public subsidies or other financial instruments, do they create an equal level of
campaign finances for candidates and parties?
There are no public subsidies for candidates and political parties (Vergara, 2012).
The FDA researchers found indirect restrictions on expenditure limits through a requirement for
―complete and balanced‖ election propaganda and coverage. These restrictions help offset no
legislated cap on contributions and no limit on expenditures.

at encouraging or persuading the electorate to vote for a particular candidate or party or against a
Audit Findings
The National Electoral Council has the authority to finance in part or in full the diffusion of
electoral propaganda in the media of radio, television, or print in accordance with regulations
that require complete and balanced election coverage. In addition, each candidate is limited to a
half page print ad in national newspapers per day, broadcast ads are limited to 3 minutes per day,
and radio ads are limited to 4 minutes per day. Therefore, FDA auditors concluded that there are
in effect indirect campaign expenditure limits on candidates and parties and allowed the scores to
reflect this. The indirect expenditure limits does not include billboards, flyers, posters, and
campaign events. The FDA auditors determined that a cap of 3 minutes per day for the 97-day
campaign period is not reflective of per capita disposable income of $12,400. For example, if a
3-minute ad costs $250,000, then that works out to $24,250,000 (USD) in advertisement expense
over the campaign period, and that does not include ads in other media sectors. The FDA
auditors determine that the electoral subsidies through National Electoral Council do not directly
create a level playing field, because they do not include billboards, flyers, posters, and campaign
events, and it is unknown to what extent the National Electoral Council disseminates election
propaganda for the distinct purpose of promoting equality among parties.
Caps on Third-party Spending
Audit Questions
1) If there is third party spending, is it restricted to citizens only?
2) If there are caps on third party spending, are they high enough and reasonably attainable by
all adult citizens?
3) Are there public subsidies, or other financial instruments, that create an equitable level of
third party spending?
The state only allows political organizations, candidates, and indigenous groups and voter groups
representing candidates disseminate election propaganda (General Election Law, Article 203).

The state requires political organizations, voter groups, candidates, indigenous communities and
organizations to register through the System Automated information of income, expenses,
receivables and accounts payable, within the first five (5) calendar days to the end of each
month, and be activated 5 days prior to the start of an election campaign (Election Resolution
No. 100304-0043, Article 259).
Audit Finding
Only candidates, parties, and indigenous organizations and voter groups representing candidates
can distribute election propaganda.
Legislative Process
Audit Question
1) Is there an effective legislative process to enforce electoral finance laws?
The National Electoral Council has the authority to set guidelines for financing and political-
electoral advertising and impose penalties when these guidelines are not followed (Election
Power Act, Article 33 (20); Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article 293(3)).
The National Electoral Council has the authority to determine and regulate all matters pertaining
to the financing of national election campaigns (Election Power Act, Article 33 (23)).
The National Electoral Council has the authority to ensure compliance with laws on financing of
election campaigns of political organizations, constituency, civic groups, or citizens and
independent candidates (Election Power Act, Article 33 (24)).
The Committee on Political Participation and Financing has the authority to control, regulate,
and investigate funds for political purposes and electoral campaign financing (Election Power
Act, Article 64).
The National Bureau of Financing has the authority to investigate election wrongdoing as
directed by the Committee on Political Participation and Financing (Election Power Act, Article
69).
The state has a system of sanctions for individuals and organizations found guilty of electoral
misconduct (Election Law, Article 227).
Punitive measures include: 15 to 50 tax units or equivalent of one day of arrest per tax unit for
election officials who refuse to accept the vote of electors entitled to vote; 20 to 60 tax units to
proportional arrest for impeding the election process or election propaganda or promote a
candidate who has failed to meet registration requirements; 5000 to 7000 tax units for public or
private media refusal to broadcast election propaganda, public or private media disseminating

election propaganda within 48 hours prior to Election Day, or breach the fairness of media
coverage; 500 to 700 tax units or proportional arrest for other violations of the Election Law as
determined by a competent authority (Election Law, Articles 231-233).
The National Electoral Council is comprised of five persons not related to political organizations,
one from faculty of law or political science, one by the Citizen Power, and three nominated by
civil society. The members of the National Electoral Council are approved by a vote of two-
thirds of the National Assembly and can be removed by the National Assembly after a ruling by
the Supreme Court (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article 295 to 296).
Audit Findings
Venezuela has a comprehensive legislative process to enforce electoral finance laws that includes
an automated system of accounting, random audits, and significant punitive measures for
financial contraventions. The fact that the finances of candidates and parties are not disclosed to
the public or other candidates and parties places limits on this process; however, FDA auditors
did not deduct marks in this particular section, but rather, in the electoral finance transparency
section. In addition, a lack of transparency does not necessarily result in ineffective enforcement
of electoral finance laws. This is generally contingent on misconduct by the National Electoral
Council and sub-committees.
Total score for electoral fairness relating to electoral finance: 52.5 percent out of 100 percent.

Analysis
The FDA auditors measured an unacceptable passing score of 52.5 percent for Venezuelan
electoral finance legislation. The FDA auditors identified an innovative process of indirect caps
and limits on campaign contributions and expenditures, a strong legislative process for electoral
finance including automated filing system, random audits, and strong enforcement mechanisms.
However, the absence of direct or indirect limit on billboards, flyers, posters, and campaign
events, the expense for mass-media advertisements that are not reflective of per capita disposable
income, and the fact that electoral finances are only transparent to the state might work to
counteract these positive aspects. The potential for financial corruption by pro-government
parties, an unequal standard of financial audits, targeting of contributors to anti-government
parties by the state, and an unequal financial playing field for candidates and parties are evident.
FDA summaries of the key findings on the Venezuelan electoral finance laws and their
impact
1) Electoral finances are only transparent to the state through the National Electoral Council.
Impact
There is the potential for financial corruption by pro-government parties, because only the
state is privy to electoral finances.
The state may apply unequal financial accounting and auditing measures, and thereby favor
pro-government parties.
The state may target contributors to anti-government parties for discrimination or
punishment.
2) No direct caps or limits on campaign contributions and expenditures.
Impact
The state‘s indirect caps and limits on contributions and expenditures apply to mass media
advertisement; however, advertisement levels are not reflective of per capita disposable
income and might favor wealthier parties.
Media limitations do not apply to billboards, flyers, posters, and campaign events, giving
wealthier parties an unfair advantage in this realm of advertisement.

3) The state allows corporations to contribute to candidates, parties, voter groups, and
indigenous organizations.
Impact
Electoral law relating to campaign contributions favors corporations over the electorate.
Corporate earnings are clearly higher than per capita disposable income, allowing for a
greater impact on the election process and outcome than from the majority.
Venezuela requires significant reforms of its electoral finance legislation. As it stands, there
is the potential for electoral finance corruption and an unfair playing field for parties and
candidates. To put Venezuela‘s score of 52.5 percent in context, in an identical audit the
United States received a failing score of 48.25 percent, a score that takes into account zero
caps on contributions, no limit on expenditures by non-connected third parties (Super PACs),
and no expenditure limits for privately funded presidential and congressional candidates
(FDA Global Electoral Fairness Report on the United States, 2012).

Chapter Two: Media Election Coverage
This chapter focuses on Venezuelan‘s media laws and the FDA's audit of them. Based on the
concepts of egalitarianism and political liberalism, the FDA audit team examined media laws
according to the standard of broad and balanced political coverage before, during and after a
campaign period (see Appendix for further explanation). Table 2 below shows the FDA‘s audit
variables, their corresponding audit weights, and results:
Table 2
Media Election
Coverage Section
Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
Audit
Results
% Results
Broad and Balanced
Election Coverage
30% 3.0 3.0 100%
Media Ownership 15% 1.5 1.5 100%
Survey/Polls 5% 0.5 0.5 100%
Freedom of Media 40% 4.0 4.0 100%
Press Code of
Practice/Conduct
10% 1.0 1.0 100%
Sections
n/a n/a n/a n/a
Total 100% 10 10 100%
Broad and Balanced Political Coverage
Audit Questions
1) During the campaign period, is the media (private and public) required legally to
publish/broadcast broad/balanced coverage of registered candidates and parties?
2) Outside of the campaign period, is the media legally required to publish/broadcast
pluralistic/balanced coverage of registered parties?
3) If the media is legally required to publish/disseminate broad and balanced political coverage,
are there reasonable monitoring and penalty mechanisms in place?
The Election Law does not prevent the President from conducting his professional duty during an
election, including speeches on all the country‘s TV channels and radio stations (Vergara, 2012).
The state requires equal media access to all registered candidates and parties (Election Law,
Principles and Rights, Article 72(10)).
The state allows for freedom of political thought and expression (Election Law, Principles and
Rights, Article 72(2)).

The state does not allow election propaganda outside of the election period. Venezuela law
defines election propaganda as information that encourages or persuades the electorate to vote
for a particular candidate or party, or against a particular candidate or party (Election Law,
Article 75(1)).
The state requires the promoter of election propaganda to be disclosed (Election Law, Article 75
(5)).
Broadcast media must not refuse to broadcast election propaganda unless directed by the
National Electoral Council (Election Law, Article 80).
Publications, radio stations, television stations and other official media may not be used by any
political party for their propaganda (Election Law, Article 35).
The state does not view candidates and leaders of political organizations, and any political group
or organization participation on talk shows, news radio or television or in social media printed,
digital, or other mass media as electioneering communication (During the Election Campaign
Propaganda, 2012).
Audit Findings
Venezuela has comprehensive legislation on broad and balanced election coverage during the
campaign period. Outside of the campaign period, the state does not allow candidates, parties,
and third-parties from disseminating election propaganda. In addition, the state disallows public
and private media from disseminating their own election propaganda. Further, the National
Electoral Council monitors election coverage, and has strong enforcement mechanisms in place
to enforce the laws on election propaganda.

Media Ownership Concentration Laws
Audit Questions
1) If there are media concentration laws, are they effective in causing a plurality of political
discourse?
2) If there is no legal requirement of media plurality, impartiality, and balanced content or
media ownership concentration laws, are there any other laws that are effective in causing a
plurality of political discourse before and during an election period?
The FDA researchers found effective and comprehensive antitrust legislation relating to media
ownership concentration. The state also requires equal candidate and party access to media,
complete and balanced campaign coverage, and impartial media election content. In addition, the
National Electoral Council has the power and authority to enforce these laws, including the
financial capacity to disseminate election propaganda.
Venezuelan antitrust laws do not allow economic concentrations that have anticompetitive
effects and/or create a dominant position. Economic concentration is the result of mergers or
acquisitions (Venezuela Antitrust Legislation, 2012).
Venezuela‘s new 2012 antitrust laws prohibit, prevent, correct, eliminate, and punish
monopolistic and oligopolistic behaviors and practices, and in general those practices that hinder
participation by all produces, suppliers etc., (Venezuelan antitrust bill establishes more ways to
expropriate, 2012).
Audit Finding
Venezuela has effective measures in place to prevent media ownership concentration through its
antitrust legislation.
Surveys/Polls
Audit Question
1) Are there reasonable public disclosure requirements on surveys and polls in terms of their
methodology, data, and funder?
The state prohibits the disclosure of results of polls or surveys, which aim to present electoral
preferences or voting intentions, seven days prior to Election Day (Election Law, Article 82).
Any publication of a political nature must have a corresponding imprint (Election Law, Article
34).

Opinion polls and surveys disseminated in the media must include the names of the persons
registered to perform the polls or surveys, and the technical specifications and methodology of
the polls or surveys (During the Election Campaign Propaganda, Article 219).
Audit Finding
Venezuela has comprehensive disclosure requirements on opinion polls and surveys, which
include information on date, methodology, and pollster and/or surveyor.
Freedom of the Media
Audit Question
1) Does constitutional or legislative law establish freedom of the media (including journalists)?
The state allows communication and information on elections to be free, diverse, plural,
accurate, and timely (Election Law, Principles and Rights, Article 72(3)).
The state supports respect for different ideas, and promotion of tolerance, transparency, and
peaceful coexistence (Election Law, Principles and Rights, Article 72(8)).
at encouraging or persuading the electorate to vote a particular candidate or party or against
The state requires for equal of media access to all registered candidates and parties (Election
Law, Principles and Rights, Article 72(10)).
Propaganda, 2012).
Any political party for its propaganda may not use publications, radio stations, television stations
and other official media (Election Law, Article 35).

The National Electoral Council will monitor election propaganda to ensure compliance with
Election Law (Election Law, Article 89).
The National Electoral Council has the authority to order media to withdraw election propaganda
if it violates Election Law. Offenders or alleged offenders may object orally or in writing within
5 days of notification. In case of dispute, within 5 days a hearing will open and a decision made
within five working days of the hearing (Election Law, Article 90).
In cases of access to information, the confidentiality of journalists and other professionals will be
retained as determined by law (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article 28).
Every Venezuelan has to right to freedom of thought and expression by any means of
communication and diffusion. Non-anonymity, war propaganda, discriminatory messages or
those promoting religious intolerance will not be tolerated (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
Constitution, Article 57).
Communication is free and plural and comes with rights and responsibilities. Every citizen has
the right to timely, accurate, and impartial information (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is irrevocably free and independent, basing its values on
freedom, equality, justice, and international peace (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
Constitution, Fundamental Principles, Article 1).
Freedom is an inherent right of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution,
Fundamental Principles, Article 1).
Venezuela holds political pluralism, liberty, justice, social responsibility, and democracy as some
its superior values (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Fundamental Principles,
Article 2).
Under the Law for Social Responsibility in Radio, Television and Electronic Media (2010),
electronic media including internet must not transit content that will ―foment anxiety in the
public or disturb public order‖, ―incite or promote disobedience of the current legal order‖,
―refuse to recognize the legitimately constituted authority‖ or ―incite or promote hatred or
intolerance.‖ The government broadcasting authority, CONATEL, has the authority to order
internet service providers to restrict access to those that violate the Social Responsibility law
(Venezuela: Legislative Assault on Free Speech, Civil Society, 2012). The FDA researchers note
that there are no restrictions on political content and election campaign content.
broadcast media that transmit content which violates the prohibitions against ‗fomenting
anxiety‖ and ―promot[ing] disobedience‖ face fines of 10 percent of their gross income and
suspension for up to 72 hours (Venezuela: Legislative Assault on Free Speech, Civil Society,

2012). The FDA researchers note that there are no restrictions on political content and election
campaign content.
broadcast media licenses may be revoked for transmitting content which ―advocate, incite or
constitute propaganda for war‖ or ―induce homicide‖ (Venezuela: Legislative Assault on Free
Speech, Civil Society, 2012). The FDA researchers note that there are no restrictions on political
content and election campaign content.
Under the Organic Law of Telecommunications (updated December 20, 2010), the state may
suspend or revoke the broadcasting concessions to private outlets if the state thinks it is
―convenient for the interests of the nation or if public order and security demands it.‖ In addition,
the assets of privately owned stations or channels whose operating license has expired or
terminated by the broadcasting authority will ―revert‖ to the state to ensure continuity of service
that these regulations may affect electoral discourse by limiting the diversity of media voices.
However, the revoked licenses are largely based on, for example, inciting hatred and violence
and not on typical political discourse.
Under the Law for the Defense of Political Sovereignty and National Self-Determination, the
state disallows Venezuelan non-governmental organizations from receiving international support
that this regulation does not prevent Venezuelan non-governmental organizations from having a
voice in election discourse.
Under the Election Law, the state forbids any citizen from insulting public officials (Walser,
2012). Article 72 states that citizens are required to respect the honor, privacy, intimacy, self-
image, confidence and reputations of individuals. Article 75 states that election propaganda must
respect the honor, privacy, intimacy, self-image, confidence and reputations of individuals and
direct obscenities and derogatory statements against the agencies and entities of public power,
institutions and public officials or public servants.
Audit Findings
In its constitution, Venezuela identifies freedom of expression as a fundamental principle of the
country. Venezuela‘s Law on Social Responsibility places limits on freedom that encourage
violence and hatred, for example. However, there are no restrictions on the freedom of the
media, within the bounds of providing complete and balanced election coverage and not
disseminating its own election propaganda. The FDA auditors did not find unreasonable limits
on freedom of the media.

Press Code of Practice/Conduct
Audit Questions
1) Does a Code of Practice/Conduct that supports impartial, balanced electoral coverage guide
the press?
2) If a Code of Practice/Conduct that supports impartial, balanced electoral coverage guides the
press, is the Code of Practice/Conduct enforceable?
The FDA researchers found no private code of conduct to guide broad and balanced press
coverage during election periods.
The FDA researchers found no legislated code of conduct to guide press coverage during the
election period. However, Venezuela has other legislation that guides the election coverage of
the press including:
Audit Findings
Venezuela has a comprehensive code of conduct for the press‘s election coverage, which
includes complete and balanced coverage, no dissemination of its own election propaganda, and
limits on daily print ads by candidates.
Total score for electoral fairness relating to media content: 100 percent out of 100 percent.

Analysis
The FDA auditors found no deficiency in Venezuela‘s media legislation, and therefore it
received 100 percent, the highest attainable score, in this audit. Venezuela balances media
freedom with complete and balanced election coverage, and thereby puts the Venezuelan
electorate first. To allow any public or private media company free reign during elections in the
name of press freedom is to act contrary to interests of the people. Democratic elections are
fundamentally about the electorate, and the media‘s role during elections is to help inform the
electorate objectively so that they can make the most informed decision on Election Day.
Venezuela recognizes and enacts this fundamental democratic principle.
In contrast, the American media legislation does not mediate electoral discourse. It allows
private media to disseminate any election information they choose, ergo such companies
determine electoral dialogue and how broad and balanced it is. This approach exposes the
American public to biased, subjective, and mis-information, especially considering that the
individual ideology and political agenda of owners and profit motivate the actions and position
of many American companies. Consequently, in the 2012 FDA United States audit, the
American media legislation received a failing score of 42.4 percent as compared to Venezuela‘s
100 percent score. Further, the FDA media study on the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election
confirmed the potential for narrow and imbalanced election coverage in the United States (FDA
Media Study of the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election, 2012).
Venezuela does not allow public or private media outlets to create election propaganda, and
requires the media to provide ―complete and balanced‖ coverage to the electorate. Media outlets
cannot refuse to disseminate election propaganda from any candidate or party unless it violates
Venezuelan law. There are no restrictions on media sharing its viewpoint on candidates and
parties, as the long as it does not take the form of election propaganda. The Venezuelan state
reserves election propaganda for candidates, parties, voter groups, and indigenous communities
and organizations. Finally, the state does not allow election propaganda outside of the 97-day
election period. The FDA likens these media regulations to a national media code of conduct
during elections. In the FDA‘s opinion, the Venezuelan approach to media is fair and just. It is
not the media‘s role or place in democracy to create election propaganda or employ its facilities
for election propaganda.
As mentioned in the research on the Venezuela‘s media laws, the Law on Social Responsibility
has no discernible impact on political expression and campaign coverage. This law pertains to
hate speech, speech that promotes and encourages violence, and other forms of malevolent
behavior. In addition, Article 72 from the Election Act prohibits slanderous attacks on candidates
and public officials, and at the same time, allows constructive criticism of candidates and public
officials. Therefore, in the FDA‘s opinion, Article 72 has little to no impact on political freedom
and election discourse.
Further, the Law of Telecommunications allows the state to suspend and revoke broadcasting
concessions to private outlets if ―public order and security demands it.‖ Again, this law pertains
to extreme situations where the state may need to assert control. The FDA thinks this law has
little or no relevant impact on political discourse or election coverage. In a historical context,

there is evidence that the Venezuelan private media aided the attempted coup in 2002. It would
follow that the state would adopt measures to prevent a similar occurrence.

Chapter Three: Candidates and Parties
This chapter focuses on Venezuelan laws pertaining to candidates and parties. The FDA audit
team examines election laws according to their equity for registered candidates and parties (see
the Appendix for further explanation). Table 3 below shows the FDA‘s audit variables, their
corresponding audit weights, and results:
Table 3
Candidates & Parties
Section Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
Audit Results % Results
Campaign Period 2% 0.2 0.2 100%
Methodology for Election
Winners
2% 0.2 0.03 15%
Electoral Boundaries 2% 0.2 0.2 100%
Process of Government 10% 1.0 1.0 100%
Registration of Candidates 2% 0.2 0.2 100%
Registration of Parties 2% 0.2 0.2 100%
Freedom of Expression
and Assembly
20% 2.0 2.0 100%
Electoral Complaints 3% 0.3 0.3 100%
Presentation of Ballots 1% 0.1 0.1 100%
Scrutineers 1% 0.1 0.1 100%
Candidate and Party
Campaign Advertisement
6% 0.6 0.5 83.33%
Sections
49% 4.9 3.19 65.1%
Total 100% 10 7.79 77.9%
Campaign Period
Audit Question
1) Does the length of the campaign period reasonably and fairly allow all registered candidates
and parties enough time to share their backgrounds and policies with the voting public?
The National Election Council determines for each election the electoral campaign period
(Election Law, Article 71).
The 2012 Venezuelan Presidential Election period is from July 1st
to October 5th
(Elecciones
presidenciales de Venezuela de 2012, 2012).
Audit Findings

The National Electoral Council determines the campaign period and FDA researchers did not
find an explicit length for the campaign period. However, in the 2012 Presidential Election, the
National Electoral Council has set the campaign period at 97 days. The FDA auditors determine
that 97 days is a reasonable length of time for candidates and parties to share backgrounds,
platforms, and policies with the electorate.
Methodology for Determining Winners of Districts
Audit Questions
1) Is the determination of election winners based on first-past-the-post?
2) Is the determination of election winners based on proportional representation closed list?
3) Is the determination of election winners based on proportional representation open list?
The Venezuelan Constitution guarantees the principles of personalization of suffrage and
proportional representation (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article 63).
30 percent of the seats in the National Assembly are determined by proportional representation,
and the rest are determined by first-past-the-post (Wilpert, 2010).
Audit Findings
Although the Venezuelan constitution guarantees proportional representation, there are no
explicit directives for this process. Currently, proportional representation closed lists decide 30
percent of the seats in the National Assembly, and FDA auditors determined a score of 0.3 (30
percent of 0.1) accordingly. First-past-the-post determines 70 percent of the seats in the National
Assembly, resulting in a 0.0 score because there is no value given to first-past-the-post (due to its
lack of proportionality).
Electoral Boundaries
Audit Question
1) Is the process for determining electoral boundaries reasonable and fair for all registered
candidates and parties?
Venezuela electoral district boundaries are based on a minimum of three legislators per state.
The total number of legislators varies in proportion to the country‘s population. The number of
legislators elected is determined by dividing the total number of residents in any given district by
1.1 percent of the national population (Suggett, 2010).

30 percent of the seats in the National Assembly are determined by proportional representation,
and the rest are determined by first-past-the-post (Wilpert, 2010).
The National Electoral Council redraws voting district boundaries (Election Power Act, Article
33(11); Venezuelan election law approved, 2009). According to the NCE the districts are
redrawn using standard legal method designed not to benefit any party. Rural districts have more
voter weight than urban districts (Suggett, 2010). The FDA researchers deem that giving more
voter weight to rural districts is reasonable and fair because urban populations are significantly
more concentrated. Federal rural districts in Canada may have more weight per voter as
compared to urban areas (Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, 2012). As of 2012, the Alberta
federal electoral districts are within 5 percent of electoral population quota, which mean some
electoral districts could have 10 percent more population than others (Proposed Electoral
Division Areas, Boundaries, and Names for Alberta, 2010).
Audit Findings
The National Electoral Council draws Venezuela electoral boundaries according to a standard
legal method designed to benefit no particular party. The FDA researchers found no evidence to
contradict this decision or process. Although rural districts garner more voter weight than urban
districts, this imbalance is relatively acceptable due to discrepancy in population density between
the two regions.
Process of Government
Audit Question
1) Within the structure of government do political representatives, individually and as
government bodies, have reasonable say in the formation of government policy, legislation
etc.?
The Venezuelan President is in power for six years, and may be re-elected with no term limit
(Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, First Amendment, Article 230).
Deputies to the National Assembly are elected for five years and may be reappointed or re-
elected, depending on position, with no term limit (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
Constitution, First Amendment, Article 192).
The Venezuelan government has four main independent branches of government: National
Executive, National Assembly, Judiciary, and Citizen Power (represented by an ombudsmen
office). The National Executive lead by the President and Vice-President is in charge of running
the country; the National Assembly is the authority of national legislation; the judiciary led by
the Supreme Court is authority on the Constitution and enforcing law, and the Ombudsman

Office is in charge of protecting the people‘s interests and rights (Bolivarian Republic of
Venezuela Constitution, Articles 72-74, 225-283, 347-350).
Venezuelan people have the power to submit referendum bills to the National Assembly if the
people in favor of the bill represent at least twenty-five percent of the electors registered.
Treaties, conventions or agreements that could compromise national sovereignty or transfer
power to supranational bodies, may be submitted to a referendum on the initiative of the
President of the Republic in Council of Ministers, by the vote of two-thirds or the members of
the Assembly, or fifteen percent of the voters registered and entered in the civil and voter
registration (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article 73).
Venezuelan people have to power to submit referendum bills to wholly or partially repeal
existing laws if the people in favor of the referendum have support from at least 10 percent of the
registered electors (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article 74).
Venezuelan people have to power to submit referendum bills to abrogate laws issued by the
President of the Republic under Article 236 if those in favor of the referendum have the support
of at least 5 percent of the registered electors. The validity of referendum requires at least 40
percent support from registered electors (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article
74).
Budget laws including taxation are not subject to referendum nor are laws for protecting,
guaranteeing, and developing human rights (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution,
Article 74).
Audit Findings
Venezuela has four main branches of government: National Executive, National Assembly,
Judiciary, and Ombudsman Office. These branches create checks and balances that work to
protect the interests of Venezuelans as a whole. In addition, Venezuela allows citizen
referendums. The President has no term limits; however, in order to continue his/her period in
office s/he must win the election every six years.
Registration of Candidates
Audit Question
1) Are the registration requirements of federal candidates reasonable and based on reasonable
popular support rather than finances?
Only Venezuelans by birth may hold the position of President and Vice-President of Venezuela,
and President and Vice-President of the National Assembly (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela

Only Venezuelans by birth or naturalization (15 years of uninterrupted residence in Venezuela)
may hold the position of Deputies of the National Assembly (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
Citizens can run as candidates of parties or as independents (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
Presidential candidates must be more than 30 years of age, layperson, registered with Electoral
Registry, and not be subject to a disqualification (Election Resolution No. 100304-0043, Article
112).
Deputy candidates for the National Assembly must be at least 21 years of age at date of the
election, resided for at least four years in a corresponding state, and be registered in the Electoral
Registry (Election Resolution No. 100304-0043, Article 113).
Independent candidates must have at least five percent support of the electorate in the
corresponding territorial scope of position (Election Resolution No. 100304-0043, Article 130).
Indigenous candidates must apply through their indigenous communities or organizations. In
addition, the candidates must meet the following requirements (Election Resolution No. 100304-
0043, Articles 142-145)
1) Have exercised by traditional authority in their respective Community.
2) Having established record in the social struggle for the recognition of their cultural identity.
3) Have taken action on behalf of the people and indigenous communities or organization.
4) Belonging to an indigenous organization legally constituted a minimum of three (3) years of
operation.
Audit Findings
Venezuela has reasonable registration requirements for presidential and deputy candidates, in
which presidential candidates must be at 30 years old, and deputy candidates must be at least 21
years old. In addition, the President must be Venezuelan by birth, while Deputies must be
Venezuelan by birth or naturalization of 15 years. There are no financial requirements on
candidate registration, and independent candidates must have at least 0.5 percent electoral
support in their corresponding election area. Indigenous candidates for three regions must have
the support of their communities prior to becoming a candidate.

Registration of Parties
Audit Question
1) Are the registration requirements of parties reasonable and based on reasonable popular
support rather than finances?
All Venezuelans have the right to associate for political purposes (Bolivarian Republic of
Venezuela Constitution, Article 67).
Political parties are required to adopt a name different from other political parties (Law on
Political Parties, Public Meetings and Demonstrations, Article 7).
Regional and national parties must have popular support of not less than 0.5 percent of the
population enrolled in the electoral registry of the respective territorial scope of party (Law on
Political Parties, Public Meetings and Demonstrations, Articles 10 and 26).
Parties must submit three copies of the party‘s statement, charter, political agenda, and statues,
and description and drawing of symbols and emblems of party, and list of party leaders and their
roles to the Supreme Electoral Council (Law on Political Parties, Public Meetings and
Demonstrations, Article 10).
Political parties in their charters are forbidden from being subordinate to the directives from
foreign entities and associations if the subordination threatens the sovereignty or independence
of the nation or bring about change by violence to the national institutions legitimately
constituted (Law on Political Parties, Public Meetings and Demonstrations, Article 6).
Citizen groups who had candidates in the last elections and obtained at least 3 percent of the vote
are not subject to fulfilling registration requirements (Law on Political Parties, Public Meetings
and Demonstrations, Article 23).
Anyone can object to or appeal decisions regarding party registration (Law on Political Parties,
Public Meetings and Demonstrations, Articles 13-15).
Renewal of national party registration requires proof of 0.5 percent popular support, or at least 1
percent of votes cast in previous election (Law on Political Parties, Public Meetings and
Demonstrations, Article 26).
Audit Findings
To be registered, political parties need at least 0.5 percent popular support. There are no financial
requirements for registration. The FDA auditors deem these registration requirements reasonable
and consider a barrier of entry necessary due to the privileges of entry such as media access and
exposure.

Electoral Complaints
Audit Questions
1) Do candidates and parties have mechanisms in which to file complaints for electoral
wrongdoing/fraud?
2) Are there reasonable mechanisms to enforce candidate and party electoral complaints?
The National Electoral Council has the authority to hear and resolve complaints under the
Election Power Act (Election Power Act, Article 33 (31)).
Any electorate may make a claim about his or her electoral registration, and complaint will go
through a legal process to determine its validity (Election Resolution No. 100304-0043, Articles
28-29; Election Law, Article 21).
Any electorate may make claims of electoral wrongdoing. There is specific process in place for
electoral complaints, including a detailed written statement of complaint/allegation,
investigation, and opportunity for defense against complaint (Election Resolution No. 100304-
0043, Articles 281-288).
The state has specific procedures for public complaints regarding election propaganda. The
complaints process involves complaint filing, investigation, appeal process, resolution including
removal of propaganda and punitive measures against violator (Election Power Act, 20-33).
Audit Findings
Venezuela has a comprehensive electoral complaints process that is open to all citizens. It
involves an appeal process and enforcement mechanisms, including immediate removal of illegal
election propaganda.

Presentation of Ballots
Audit Question
1) Are electoral lists presented on ballots in a fair, equitable way for all registered candidates
and parties?
Since the Venezuelan electoral system is almost 100 percent automated, computer screens
display the ballots. When a citizen votes, they get a print out of their vote to confirm that they
voted the way they intended (Electoral technology in Venezuela. 2012, Election Law, Articles
121 and 131).
The NCE reveals the ballots designed for the upcoming presidential elections with the
Venezuelan electorate on August 16, 2012, prior to Election Day. The purpose of sharing the
sample ballots is for informational purposes. An image of the candidates, their name, and the
name of their parties is on the ballot (Embassy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, 2012).
The FDA researches viewed images of the sample ballots.
Audit Findings
The National Electoral Council designs the ballots. FDA researchers did not find legislation on
their design but viewed a sample design for the 2012 Presidential Election. It had an image of
presidential candidates, their name, and the name of their party. In addition, the National
Electoral Council shares its ballot designs with the electorate almost two months prior to
Election Day, and allows the electorate to view the ballots prior to Election Day.
Poll Watcher and Challenger
Audit Question
1) Are candidates and parties allowed poll watchers and challengers at polling stations?
Venezuelan automated ballot system subject to observation by political representatives (Letter to
the Foundation for Democratic Advancement about the Secrecy of Venezuelan Voting Ballots,
2012).
Political representatives are permitted to ink their fingers and test different soluble substances to
verify reliability of ink used in elections ((Letter to the Foundation for Democratic Advancement
about the Secrecy of Venezuelan Voting Ballots, 2012).

At polling stations, the Electoral Board allows the local presence of electors and electoral
witnesses with no limitation other than the local physical capacity and security of the election
The tally sheet of election results shall be legible and be signed by the electors and witnesses
present (Election Law, Articles 142-143).
Political organizations, groups of electors, candidates or the candidates on their own initiative
and indigenous communities and organizations have the right to have witnesses to the electoral
bodies‘ subordinates (Election Law, Article 157).
Witnesses will not be inhibited in performing their duties by members of the electoral bodies
The automated electoral system has an electoral audit and verification audit by citizens. Electoral
audit ensures the system is fully functional and reliable. Electors receive voting receipts to
confirm that they voted as they intended (Election Law, Articles 159-162).
The Electoral Board uses the same steps as the state in determining citizenship (Election Law,
Article 163).
Audit Findings
Venezuela has comprehensive legislation on observation by political representatives during
many stages of the electoral process. In addition, the state permits political representatives to
verify key aspects of the electoral process such as finger ink used on Election Day.
Candidate and Party Advertisement
Audit Questions
1) During the campaign period, do candidates and parties have equal access to radio, television,
and print media for political advertisement, and equal cost of political advertisement?
2) During the campaign period, do candidates' and parties' political advertisements in media
include a public subsidy component to ensure an equality of political advertisement in the
media?
3) Outside of the campaign period, do candidates and parties have equal to radio, television, and
print media for political advertisement, and equal cost of political advertisement?
ads are limited to 3 minutes per day (Venezuelan Embassy Washington, 2012). Radio ads are
limited to 4 minutes per day (Walser, 2012).

The FDA researchers could not find legislation that requires an equal cost for advertisements for
all candidates and parties. The National Electoral Council‘s authority to finance the
dissemination of election propaganda, and the state requirement that the media observe a
rigorous balance of candidate and party advertisement in terms of space and time partly offsets
this lack of legislation.
Propaganda, 2012).
The FDA researchers found no legislated public subsidy component in the Venezuelan electoral
system, except indirectly through the NEC, which has the authority to finance the dissemination
of election propaganda and ensure equality of political advertisement in the press, radio, and
television. The NEC‘s authority does not include billboard, poster, and flyer advertisements. The
press, radio, and television are mass media outlets (Election Law, Article 78).
The state does not allow election propaganda outside of the election period. Venezuela law
defines election propaganda as information that encourages or persuades the electorate to vote
for a particular candidate or party, or against a particular candidate or party (Election Law,
Article 75(1)).
The state disallows posters, drawings and other propaganda on public buildings and monuments
Any political party for their propaganda may not use publications, radio stations, television
stations and other official media (Election Law, Article 35).
Audit Findings
Although electoral law demands equal access to media for all candidates and parties, there is no
provision that the media charge the same advertisement costs to all candidates and parties.
Therefore, the FDA auditors made a 50 percent deduction in its score. During the campaign
period, the National Electoral Council disseminates election propaganda and works to ensure
complete and balanced campaign coverage, which acts as an indirect subsidy for candidates and
parties. The state does not allow election propaganda outside of the campaign period.

Freedom of Speech and Assembly
Audit Question
1) Does constitutional or legislative law establish freedom of speech and assembly?
Political associations have the right to advertise during the election period by any means of
dissemination whether oral or written within the limits of the law such as no posters on public
buildings and no use of patriotic symbols and portraits or pictures of the heroes of independence
(Election Law, Articles 30 and 32).
Any political party for its propaganda may not use publications, radio stations, television stations
and other official media (Election Law, Article 35).
The National Electoral Council will monitor election propaganda to ensure compliance with
Election Law (Election Law, Article 89).

In cases of access to information, the law maintains the confidentiality of journalists and other
professionals (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article 28).
communication and diffusion. The law does not tolerate non-anonymity, war propaganda,
discriminatory messages or those promoting religious intolerance (Bolivarian Republic of
Article 2).
The state permits meetings and demonstrations in public places. Organizers must give 24-hour
notice for the meeting or demonstration. An alternative day and time may be established if there
is a simultaneous meeting or demonstration taking place. The state does not regulate private
meetings (Law on Political Parties, Public Meetings and Demonstrations, Articles 36-46).
Under Election Law, the state forbids any citizen from insulting public officials (Ray Walser,
2012). Article 72 states that citizens are required to respect the honor, privacy, intimacy, self-
image, confidence and reputations of individuals. Under Article 75, election propaganda shall
not disrespect respect the honor, privacy, intimacy, self-image, confidence and reputation of
individuals or direct obscenities and derogatory statements against the agencies and entities of
public power, institutions and public officials or public servants.
Audit Findings
The Venezuelan Constitution and Election Law establish and guarantee freedom of speech and
assembly. The FDA auditors did not identify unreasonable restrictions on freedom of expression
or assembly for candidates, parties, or the public. The Law of Social Responsibility does not
apply to political expression and assembly. Article 72 of the Election Law applies, partly, to
slanderous, disrespectful, and dishonorable personal attacks on candidates, and not political
expression.
Total score for electoral fairness relating to candidates and parties: 77.9 percent out of 100
percent.

Analysis
Venezuela‘s legislation pertaining to candidates and parties received a score of 77.9 percent.
Without considering variables from other sections, the FDA measured a score of 94.7 percent for
the candidates and parties section. Based on this score, Venezuela has an exceptionally fair
playing field for candidates and parties. The FDA did not identify any deficiencies in legislation
directly related to candidates and parties. Although Article 62 of the Constitution mentions
proportional representation and this process determines only 30 percent of electoral seats, there is
no specific legislative or constitutional requirement on how proportional representation
determines electoral districts.
The legislation on ―complete and balanced‖ election coverage in the media helps to ensure a fair
playing field for candidates, as do the caps on electoral propaganda in the mass media. In
addition, the registration of candidates and parties through established popular support
encourages candidates and parties who represent the voice of the people to participate in the
election.
The main deficiencies in the candidates and parties section stem from the finance section. Most
notably, there are no caps or limits on campaign contributions and expenditures, and the National
Electoral Council‘s ability to ensure complete and balanced coverage only partly offsets this
shortcoming. For example, billboards, flyers, posters, and campaign events are not included in
the NEC‘s directive, and therefore a party with higher contributions will have more opportunity
to influence the electorate. In addition, there is no legislative requirement for equal cost of
advertisement, and therefore the media could favor a particular party over others.

Chapter Four: Voters
This chapter focuses on the Venezuelan electoral laws relating to voters. The FDA audit team
gauges these laws according to their equity for voters. This implies an equal value for each vote
cast, equitable opportunity for voters prior to and during the campaign period and reasonable
means to take advantage of these opportunities. The FDA acknowledges that absolute equal
opportunity is not likely attainable. For example, it is implausible that either government or
society can ensure that every citizen have the same education, income, intelligence, leisure time
etc. However, the FDA is interested in the overall equity of Venezuelan legislation relating to
voters. Does the legislation promote equity within reasonable bounds? Are there areas of the
legislation that clearly favour certain voters? Table 4 below shows the FDA‘s audit variables,
their corresponding audit weights, and results:
Table 4
Voters Section
Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
Audit
Results
% Results
Blackout Period 2% 0.2 0.2 100%
Value of a Vote 5% 0.5 0.5 100%
Freedom of Speech and
Assembly
20% 2.0 2.0 100%
Voter Registration
Requirements
2% 0.2 0.2 100%
Voter Electoral
Complaints Process
3% 0.3 0.3 100%
Voter Protection 2% 0.2 0.2 100%
Voter Assistance 2% 0.2 0.2 100%
Citizens Living Abroad 2% 0.2 0.2 100%
Inclusion of Minorities 2% 0.2 0.2 100%
Sections
60% 6.0 3.59 59.83%
Total 100% 10 8.49 84.9%
Blackout Period
Audit Question
1) Is the length of the campaign blackout period reasonable?
The state requires election propaganda to cease within 48 hours of Election Day (Election Law,
Article 232(2)).

The state prohibits disclose results of polls or surveys, which aim to present electoral preferences
or voting intentions, seven days prior to Election Day (Election Law, Article 82).
Audit Findings
The Venezuelan electoral process dictates a 48-hour blackout period for election propaganda,
and 7-day blackout period on opinions polls and surveys. Using professional judgment and
knowledge of other electoral systems, the FDA auditors determine that the Venezuelan blackout
periods give the electorate sufficient time and space to formulate a clear decision of who to vote
for.
Value of a Vote
Audit Question
1) Is the electoral (numerical) value of votes the same for all eligible voters?
Electors have the right to one vote per election (Election Law, Article 125).
Audit Finding
The state allows Venezuelans one vote per person.
Freedom of Speech and Assembly
Audit Question
1) Does constitutional or legislative law establish freedom of speech and assembly?
communication and diffusion. The law does not tolerate non-anonymity, war propaganda,

discriminatory messages or those promoting religious intolerance (Bolivarian Republic of
Article 2).
The state permits meetings and demonstrations in public places. Organizers must give 24-hour
notice for the meeting or demonstration. An alternative day and time may be established if there
is a simultaneous meeting or demonstration taking place. The state does not regulate private
meetings (Law on Political Parties, Public Meetings and Demonstrations, Articles 36-46).
Every citizen has the right to demonstrate peacefully and unarmed (Bolivarian Republic of
Venezuelan people have the power to submit referendum bills to the National Assembly if the
people in favor of the bill represent at least twenty-five percent of the electors registered.
Treaties, conventions or agreements that could compromise national sovereignty or transfer
power to supranational bodies, may be submitted to a referendum on the initiative of the
President of the Republic in Council of Ministers, by the vote of two-thirds or the members of
the Assembly, or fifteen percent of the voters registered and entered in the civil and voter
registration (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article 73).
Venezuelan people have to power to submit referendum bills to wholly or partially repeal
existing laws if the people in favor of the referendum have support from at least 10 percent of the
registered electors (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article 74).
Venezuelan people have to power to submit referendum bills to abrogate laws issued by the
President of the Republic under Article 236 if those in favor of the referendum have the support
of at least 5 percent of the registered electors. The validity of referendum requires at least 40
percent support from registered electors (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution, Article
74).
Budget laws including taxation are not subject to referendum nor are laws for protecting,
guaranteeing, and developing human rights (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela Constitution,
Article 74).

Venezuela--2012 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Audit Report (Revised April 15, 2013)

Venezuela--2012 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Audit Report (Revised April 15, 2013)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Venezuela--2012 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Audit Report (Revised April 15, 2013)

Similar to Venezuela--2012 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Audit Report (Revised April 15, 2013) (18)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Venezuela--2012 FDA Global Electoral Fairness Audit Report (Revised April 15, 2013)