Page 73 - Anatomy-of-a-Fraud

could possibly have been used to challenge the results from 60 precincts whose tally
sheets had not even been made public yet? There is no logical or legitimate answer to
this question.
Fortunately, in this particular circuit, ADO was able to counteract the
UNADE’s fraudulent intent by challenging returns from the entire circuit, thus
preventing doctored circuit returns from being added to the national total. But, on the
other hand, returns tally sheets from most of the Circuit Returns Boards had been
altered by not showing the total number of votes cast for the candidates and by more
of Arias’s votes than Barletta’s.

Subsequently, the Electoral Board dismissed all challenges filed in the San
Miguelito District and proceeded to do by itself the job the District Board would have
done, i.e., to audit the San Miguelito returns tally sheets. At that “audit”, Tribunal
Secretary Tomlinson deprived Arias of more than 900 votes, right under the nose of
Presiding Justice Quintero. More about this incident later.

These challenges resulted in the ADO lead being reduced by at least 1,400
votes in Colón, by 900 in Bocas del Toro, and by 850 votes in Chiriquí. A total of 3,150
votes! and the margin of Barletta’s alleged victory was a mere 1,713 votes.

And yet, the deplorable strategy of massive and arbitrary challenges would
not have worked out without the active participation of the Electoral Tribunal, which
thus became a direct accessory to the fraud.

To understand how this fraud was perpetrated, it should be remembered that
the Electoral Tribunal was called upon to review each challenge and to accept or
dismiss it on its merits. Should a challenge be accepted, the results from that particular
precinct would be declared null and void and, therefore, would not be added to the
district or the national totals. On the other hand, if the Electoral Tribunal dismissed a
challenge, the returns in question should logically and under the law be added to the
district and national totals. The case of the San Miguelito District, noted above, is an
instance in which the Electoral Tribunal dismissed the challenges and then tallied and
added the votes to the district and national totals.

Nonetheless, the Electoral Tribunal, in a ruling that shall probably be recalled
as one of the grossest juridical aberrations committed during this fraudulent electoral
process, dismissed all challenges on insufficient grounds BUT failed to add, as required
by law and logic, the challenged votes to the district and national totals, leaving them
in a sort of “legal limbo” that benefitted Barletta and thwarted the electorate’s will.

If the Electoral Tribunal had abided by the law and added those totals, i.e., the
2,435 votes arbitrarily challenged in Colón, Bocas del Toro and Chiriquí, Arias would
have won the elections by a margin of 722 votes.

And Barletta would later say that he won fair and square!