Electoral body puts off talk on fingerprints, audit, and Maduro
Experts claim there is no way to breach the secrecy of the vote
Although a meeting of the directors of the electoral body was convened for Thursday, the meeting did not take place. Therefore, they failed to discuss the three proposals advanced by CNE's director Vicente Díaz on May 8: 1) Conducting a fingerprint non-duplicity audit of voters turning out on April 14 presidential election; 2) Producing right away a report incidences of SAI; and 3) Reviewing voters' lists in search of people already dead by the time the election was held and whose names had not been erased from the register of voters.
Since the heads of the electoral body have failed to hold a meeting so far, there has been neither a discussion nor a single statement regarding Maduro's words affirming that the authorities had already identified the names and identity numbers of some 900,000 individuals who voted Chávez on the presidential election held on October 7, 2012, but did not cast their votes on the presidential election of April 14, 2013.
In the meantime, opposition experts state Nicolás Maduro may well be informed about who did not vote (with respect to October 7 election), if the CNE granted privileged access to the electronic voters' lists (kept in ballot machines the day of the election) or if ruling party PSUV was given privileged access to data from the Voters Information System (SIE), used in polling centers with two or three polling stations.
Nevertheless, experts assert there is no way to breach the secret of the ballot.
Experts from the National Electoral Board believe that the results of the audit may be available by mid-September, when all procedures will have been completed.
Pablo Jiménez Guaricuco was summarily dismissed from his Clerk III job at the Autonomous Service of Public Registries and Notaries' Offices (Saren). He read a notice published in a newspaper on November 5 informing the public that he was no longer employed to the Saren. He was sacked despite the fact that he was taking a leave of absence from work due to a work-related accident, and that he enjoyed security of employment under the parental job-immunity privilege. Most probably, the decision was influenced by his role as a union organizer. But what did he do, besides leading protests, to deserve the sack? Well, he allegedly sent off a series of tweets that definitely hurt the sensitivity of the Saren Directorate.