Final evaluation of IFES/electoral assistance component

The International Foundation for Electoral Assistance (IFES) was the implementing agency. IFES improved operations of the National Electoral Tribunal (Jurado) in carrying out the 1995 general election, though problems remained in areas such as training poll workers. After the 1995 elections, IFES worked with the Jurado, the National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE), and the National Registry of Electoral and Civil Identity (IDENTIDAD) to build up the institutional capacity of the newly defined electoral system. The municipal elections of 1995/96 were carried out with a reasonable degree of organization, despite jurisdictional disputes. Lessons learned from the 1995 elections were taken into account in such areas as the development of training materials. However, a crisis mentality still prevailed and the testing of messages that makes for good educational material were still not incorporated into design efforts. IFES's attempts to help all three new organizations develop an organizational culture adequate to their responsibilities have had mixed success. The Jurado has not instituted the organizational changes needed to fulfill its new roles successfully. ONPE has begun to talk of the need for strategic planning; has simplified its organizational structure, reducing levels of hierarchy and the number of permanent staff; and begun to incorporate the concept, if not the effective practice, of testing its training materials. IDENTIDAD is concerned with its capacity to deal with the public, with public acceptance and understanding of the changes proposed, with the political dimensions of its role (as witness the recent controversy over enrolling parties), and with its internal capacity to meet its management requirements. A further critical concern is financing. All three entities receive far less from the Government of Peru than what they consider required to carry out their tasks. The proposed solutions suggest what may amount to a de facto poll tax -- which would impeded voting by those who already have limited access, namely, the poor, above all the rural poor, who constitute a significant portion of the country's population. In the civil society component, IFES supported a variety of NGOs in such areas as transparency in polling processes, dialogue on the election issues, citizen participation in general and in rural areas, and the role of the press in the electoral process. The bulk of the more than $500,000 for this component went to a single organization (Transparencia) -- with impressive results. Transparencia carried out important functions as a poll watching agency for the national and municipal elections, establishing a reputation for objectivity across the political spectrum. Its multimedia center is an important source of data regarding elections. Another NGO group, SER/CEAPAZ, undertook an important effort to increase voter awareness in rural areas. However, these efforts are not likely to be sustained under present circumstances. Transparencia is in an extremely precarious financial situation, and SER must support its existence by other activities. Other NGOs are either too weak to continue or are directed elsewhere. While support for the NGOs was not intended to promote sustainability, it would certainly have been an advantage, and perhaps a necessity, for future democratic development if civil society organizations with reputations for honesty, objectivity, and the capacity to perform were present within the electoral process. Finally, aside from developing a book and other materials and calling attention to the issues through some well-publicized fora, the policy dialogue component achieved no concrete result. Needs for the future are to: promote greater access of economically disadvantaged citizens, above all in rural areas, to the electoral process; enhance the civic culture of citizens as voters; enhance the capacity of citizens, as administrators of the electoral process, to limit the loss of votes by nullification; and promote a policy dialogue that enhances the likelihood of a more comprehensible process for selecting members of Congress by bringing the individual voter closer to his or representative. (Author abstract, modified)