Smartmatic’s Controversial Presence in Venezuelan Elections Post-Withdrawal
Following its withdrawal from Venezuela after denouncing election fraud in 2017, Smartmatic’s software was subsequently used in three elections, including municipal and presidential polls, raising serious questions about the company’s integrity. Documents indicate Smartmatic collaborated covertly through an Argentine firm, despite public statements denying participation. The ongoing legal scrutiny facing Smartmatic compounds concerns regarding election credibility in Venezuela and the company’s operational ethics.
Smartmatic, an electronic-voting firm, publicly criticized Venezuela’s governmental actions concerning a manipulated election in 2017, subsequently announcing its withdrawal from the nation. Despite this assertion, documentation acquired by the Miami Herald reveals that Smartmatic authorized its software for deployment in three subsequent elections in Venezuela, specifically the municipal elections in December 2017 and the contested presidential election in May 2018, with at least two of these instances being carried out covertly. Sources familiar with the National Electoral Council (CNE) indicated that Smartmatic’s involvement was intentionally obscured, utilizing an Argentine firm, Ex-Cle, to mask its participation. It was noted that Smartmatic technicians continued to support the software’s integration into the voting systems. Following Smartmatic’s initial public declaration of non-involvement, the company acknowledged to the Herald that its software had indeed been utilized in the aforementioned elections, albeit maintaining that its software lacked authenticity due to the absence of Smartmatic’s oversight in the operational processes. Smartmatic asserted that its software can only be deemed authentic if closely managed and audited by the company itself. This stance, however, seems to contradict past statements, including a July 2020 declaration that the company had not provided any services or software to the Venezuelan authorities since parting ways in 2017. A notable audit ahead of the 2018 presidential election bore the signature of Juan Valera, Smartmatic’s software associate manager, who had travelled to Venezuela to install necessary certifications for the voting machines. Despite Smartmatic’s claims to the contrary, sources confirm that the software in the elections following the 2017 withdrawal belonged to Smartmatic. Valera’s dual role as an advisor further obscured the reality of Smartmatic’s persistent involvement. Simultaneously, it was indicated that payments for software services were diverted to Smartmatic through Ex-Cle, leading to complications in the subsequent political narrative surrounding election integrity. Smartmatic faced renewed scrutiny regarding its integrity when earlier this year, U.S. legal actions were taken against its founder, Roger Piñate, for allegedly engaging in corrupt practices related to election contracts abroad. This backdrop forms a significant part of the ongoing discussions surrounding the validity of electoral processes in countries where Smartmatic operates, including Venezuela. In sum, the revelations raise significant questions regarding the transparency and authenticity of elections in Venezuela, as well as the operational ethics of Smartmatic following its claimed withdrawal. The ongoing reactions from both U.S. authorities and international stakeholders underscore the critical need for accountability within electoral frameworks globally.
Smartmatic, founded in 2000 by three Venezuelans, gained recognition after being selected by the Venezuelan government to revamp its voting machines for the 2004 elections. Following a series of controversies related to political fraud within the Venezuelan electoral system, Smartmatic denounced the 2017 elections for fraud and subsequently declared an end to its operations in the nation. However, documents have surfaced indicating Smartmatic’s licensing of software for elections that occurred after its declared withdrawal, leading to significant discourse regarding the company’s operational integrity and the observance of democratic processes in Venezuela. Additionally, Smartmatic is currently involved in legal challenges related to accusations of corruption concerning elections in other nations, indicating broader implications for its operational practices.
In light of the information disclosed, it is evident that Smartmatic’s involvement in Venezuelan elections continued post-2017, despite public declarations to the contrary. The revelations indicate a systematic attempt to obscure its participation through third-party facilitators, raising grave concerns about the integrity of the electoral process in Venezuela and the ethical practices of Smartmatic. Legal challenges facing Smartmatic further reflect the scrutiny of its operations and underscore the importance of transparency in electoral systems worldwide.
Original Source: www.miamiherald.com
