Bolivia: Defiant Santa Cruz votes separatist referendum, Govt says fraud (Updated III)

Thanks for inviting me to post my photo.

I would like to add some clarifications and corrections:

• calling the referendum 'separatist' is a little exagerated.  The political leaders promoting the Autonomous Statutes always express their will to keep the country unified.  Voices calling for indipendance are scarce, allthough the Statutes give the departamental government a lot (too many) competences.
• How the old Benjamin Ticona died is unclear.  He might have died a natural dead (according to local television he was 78 years old).  He died in his house, not on the street.
• As expected, promoters of the Autonomous Statutes focus on the aproval rate (85%) while those opposed to the Statutes focus on the small turnout of the referendum (allthough the exact turnout is still unknown).  For what I hear on the street is that a lot of people are in favour of more autonomy for the regions and departments but do not agree with the way the Statutes where written (which was a very untransparent and undemocratical proces) or the content of the Statutes (which basically replaces the centralism of the state with a centralism of the department, with little or no autonomy for the provincial or municipal governments.

good stuff:

Good you reported on this subject but, like all the media here in Bolivia, the article expresses mostly a view of one of the two (extremist) political sides (the national government on one hand, the political leaders of Santa Cruz and all their media backing on the other hand).
I really regret not having a media channel that reports from a neutral point of view. The truth always lies in between the two dominant media views, but it is hard to decide who is lying and to what degree.

good stuff:

Thanks for weighing in with those nuanced arguments, maartenzam

Thanks for asking to use my Flickr graphic (though you picked a very outdated one).  Now, a number of the facts in your news story are incorrect. Though there were rumors that ballots were pre-marked, those ran only in state television, and were unconfirmed. Voter turnout was about 65% (not 35%, that was the figure for voter abstention). Calling the vote "separatist" is also somewhat innacurate (and editorializing). I'm not sure where you got the idea that Evo Morales spoke about a 50% rejection. He didn't. Nor is there any evidence to contradict the 85% approval of the measure. The vote has handled by the department's electoral court (an agency of the national electoral court). Finally, the mention of violence is odd, especially since it didn't mention that most of the violence was initiated by pro-MAS supporters and that the national police stood by and watched (this was shown on non-state television) as voters were prevented from voting in a few places. Additionally, there were international observers (you claim there weren't). It's also important to discuss the 2008 autonomy referendum on the basis of the 2006 autonomy referendum: in 2006 Evo's government agreed to grant autonomy to the departments who voted for it (four did, including Santa Cruz), but then rescinded that pledge. Hence, the murkiness of the legality of the move. For more analysis, you can always try my blog: bolivia.mcentellas.com

Rahul: I provided a link back to my blog, where I write about this issue in greater detail. I've covered Bolivia for the past 5-6 years. I'm an political science professor who specializes in Bolivian politics.