On Tuesday, May 30, the president of the UCV Electoral Commission, Carlos Martín, assured that the university was indeed prepared to carry out the electoral process. However, he said that the irregularities could have been sabotage.
Next Friday, June 2, the University Council of the Central University of Venezuela (UCV) will evaluate the schedule and budget for the elections of authorities, deferred to June 9, after the process, originally scheduled for Friday, May 26, presented irregularities in the delivery of electoral party favors.
«The University Council ends where a preliminary report from the Technical Monitoring Commission was presented, the date of June 9 is maintained However, the schedule and budget will be evaluated on Friday, June 2 in extraordinary CU,” he reported on May 31, through his account on the social network Twitter. jonathan carrillodeputy president of the Federation of University Centers (FCU) of the UCV.
*Read also: UCV Electoral Commission says that they were organized but they suspect sabotage
#InformationUCV ??| ends on #University Council where a preliminary report from the Technical Monitoring Commission was presented, the date of the #9June however, the schedule and budget will be evaluated on Friday, June 2 in extraordinary CU#TheUCV wants to vote https://t.co/Y6l521bV2y
– Yonnathan G Carrillo (@Yonnathan_gc) May 31, 2023
On Tuesday, May 30, the president of the UCV Electoral Commission, Carlos Martín, assured that the university was indeed prepared to carry out the electoral process. However, he said the irregularities could have been due to sabotage.
The day before, the Electoral Commission presented a report in which he revealed that since May 15 the problems began to carry out the elections in the UCV on the scheduled date (May 26).
The chronology of events set forth in the Electoral Commission’s report shows that ten days earlier the required information was lost “due to errors made by the support staff hired by the Electoral Commission to verify all the data in the electoral records. This fact resulted in the technical staff of the Commission having to redo all the data and the associated computer processes again, which harmed the subsequent processes”, it is explained in point 3 of the document.
Although in the report, the UCV Electoral Commission confirmed its expertise in carrying out “innumerable electoral processes”, the chain of errors and delays heralded a bad outcome, which actually happened.
The official response that was reflected in the report is that the members of the Commission “under the principle of good faith carried out by the staff, never had doubts about their work and ability to carry out the process, because they have already executed these procedures in previous elections, without problems. We recognize the inadequate supervision of the processes, derived from the above and from the haste in the times that brought us closer to the day of the election.
Post Views: 105
