Why EU monitors should observe Venezuela’s presidential election

The author is senior research fellow for Latin America at Chatham House and a fellow at the London School of Economics School of Public Policy

In the coming weeks, the EU will consider whether to send a delegation to monitor Venezuela’s July 28 presidential election. Despite the already flawed electoral conditions and angry resistance within the Venezuelan government, the European parliament should send a mission. Failure to do so will not just mean abandoning Venezuelan citizens. It will reduce the influence of the EU and other credible international groups over the troubled South American country’s future and in the global defence of democratic rights.

Since agreeing to hold a free and fair presidential election, Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro and his government have done everything to tilt the playing field in their favour. Before the government announced the date for the ballot, Maduro and his allies had started to arrest or threaten opposition leaders. They disqualified opponents including the designated opposition candidate, María Corina Machado, from running in the election.

Last week, Jorge Rodríguez, the president of Venezuela’s national assembly, added to the pre-election turmoil, declaring that the country’s electoral body should retract any offer to the EU to observe the contest.

In spite of legitimate concerns over election standards and local hostility, an EU election team in Venezuela remains essential. Let the Venezuelan government rail against the EU and continue to attempt to game its re-election: the EU is one of the few remaining voices that can help protect Venezuelans’ hopes.  

In November 2021, the EU sent a 134-member observation mission to Venezuela to monitor regional and local elections. The mission’s on-the-ground presence brought international attention to the Maduro government’s electoral abuses. These observations formed the basis of a report that laid out 23 recommendations to improve future elections. While the Maduro government has failed to implement many of them, the report has become a touchstone for the Venezuelan opposition and civil society for the upcoming presidential contest. 

But precedent and follow-up are not the only reasons why an EU mission needs to be in place before July 28.

For one, the presence of professional, independent witnesses serves — whether in Venezuela or elsewhere — as a source of protection for voters and opposition leaders in polarised and dangerous environments. Credible election observers with connections to multilateral organisations and independent civil society are key to alerting the international community to abuses and threats. Even when such groups cannot ensure a free and fair election, they play a vital role in protecting lives and calming tensions before and after the vote.  

There are also economic reasons why the EU would want to encourage a peaceful electoral and political process in Venezuela. Since the US agreed to liberalise its economic sanctions after the Maduro government’s commitment to free and fair elections, though in mid-April it retightened those sanctions by requiring companies to apply for independent licences, companies in France, Italy, Spain and the UK now have a stake in the Venezuelan economy. Their economic investment and engagement constitute an important point of leverage for stability and reconciliation there. 

Last, and most important, are the citizens of Venezuela. According to recent surveys conducted by the Venezuelan firm Delphos, 65 per cent of Venezuelans today support the electoral route for the resolution of political differences. With so many citizens pinning their hopes on these elections, groups such as the EU owe it to them to defend their democratic aspirations.

Without the EU and other independent, credible institutions, Venezuelan citizens and the international democratic norms they have embraced — in Venezuela and globally — will be left alone.