Smartmatic, having previously condemned the Venezuelan government for electoral fraud and announcing its withdrawal in 2017, was later found to have its software used in several elections in Venezuela, contradicting its public statements. Insider sources indicated a deliberate cover-up involving a third-party firm, raising significant ethical concerns about the company’s transparency and role in the Venezuelan electoral process during a tumultuous political climate.
Smartmatic, a prominent electronic-voting technology company, criticized the Venezuelan government for electoral misconduct during the 2017 National Constituent Assembly election. Following this incident, the company publicly declared its withdrawal from Venezuela after a 13-year tenure. However, it has come to light through documentation provided by Venezuela’s National Electoral Council to the Miami Herald that Smartmatic’s software was in fact utilized in three subsequent Venezuelan elections, including the municipal elections in December 2017 and the controversial presidential election in May 2018. Insider sources confirmed that Smartmatic’s involvement was deliberately obscured. Venezuelan officials collaborated with the Argentine firm Ex-Cle to mask Smartmatic’s participation. These sources revealed that Smartmatic’s technicians were actively engaged in preparing their software for election use despite the publicized end of the partnership with the Venezuelan government. Smartmatic’s software Associate Manager, Juan Valera, was noted to have signed off on software audits prior to the 2018 election, further indicating continued operational connections. While Smartmatic initially denied its software’s utilization in Venezuelan elections following its withdrawal, its stance shifted when presented with evidence contradicting its claims. Although Smartmatic maintained that their software could not be considered authentic without the company’s direct involvement throughout the election process, audits demonstrated their software’s presence in the elections held after their announced departure. In light of these developments, Smartmatic’s statements on its role raise significant questions about the company’s integrity and operational transparency in Venezuela. The ongoing contention surrounding the legitimacy of elections in Venezuela underscores broader issues related to electoral integrity and corporate accountability in politically sensitive environments. Smartmatic’s history in the region has now placed it at the center of a critical discourse on the ethical obligations of technology providers in democratic processes.
The role of Smartmatic in Venezuelan electoral processes has been contentious, particularly since the company publicly withdrew its services amidst accusations of fraud in 2017. Despite ceasing operations, it has been revealed that Smartmatic continued to play a pivotal role in subsequent elections through its software, raising ethical questions regarding its accountability and transparency. The company’s association with elections marked by allegations of manipulation implicates broader concerns regarding the intersection of technology and governance, especially in regimes characterized by political instability.
The revelations surrounding Smartmatic’s continued involvement in Venezuelan elections despite its official withdrawal raise serious questions regarding the company’s ethical practices and the integrity of election processes in the nation. The decision to obscure its participation through intermediaries reflects a troubling precedent for electoral technology providers, highlighting the necessity for greater transparency and accountability in the deployment of voting technologies in politically charged environments. Ultimately, this situation underscores the critical importance of protecting democratic processes from any actions that may compromise their legitimacy.
Original Source: www.miamiherald.com
