The results of an investigation that rules out fraud in last October's elections in Bolivia were published today by the U.S. daily The Washington Post.
The electoral process was questioned by the Organization of American States (OAS) in its final report based on alleged irregularities related to a preliminary halt in the vote count, the computerized system, forgery, alteration of data and a deficient chain of custody.
In the article ¿Ganó Evo? (Evo Won?) its authors, researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Science and Electoral Data Laboratory John Curiel and Jack R. Williams, recall that from that point on the coup machine began to work until Evo Morales resigned at the behest of the Armed Forces and the National Police.
However, in their investigation they found no evidence to support the claim of electoral fraud that served as a justification for the Bolivian right wing to carry out the coup d'état and support the establishment of a de facto government.
Curiel and Williams note that beyond the questionable claims of the OAS, a victory for Morales in the first round of elections was indeed possible, as determined at the time by the Supreme Electoral Court, since according to Bolivian law he was able to do so by accumulating 40 percent of the votes and a 10 percent advantage over his rival Carlos Mesa.
The investigation records that there is no evidence of a significant statistical difference between Morales' margin of advantage over Mesa before and after the aforementioned preliminary halt in the vote count, but rather points to an advantage of more than ten percent for the Movement Towards Socialism candidate.
Similarly, the analysis reveals that the OAS report highlights changes in the trend of votes after the preliminary stop of the count without taking into account a series of variables.