2005 Aruban Election Recount; MEP Wins (Looks a bit like 2000 Florida Recount?)

 

Yesterday, a recount took place in Aruba as to whether there may have been any errors inRecount1 the initial counting of votes that gave the present ruling party MEP control. All parties were present today to watch the one by one hand count and although some votes were thrown out due to ink spots.

According to sources is Aruba, the recount came about as one of the smaller parties “Real Democracy,” a satellite of AVP was only 20 votes short of a seat which would have given the ‘opportunity’ to coalition with AVP, MPA and RED and win the election. A change of 20 votes one way or the other would have made the drastic difference in a MEP controlled government or a coalition one. 20 votes.

Doesn’t this sound familiar to the Presidential election of 2000 and Florida recount? By looking at some of the votes that were actually not considered, yes it does remind me a little of the chaos that was the Florida recount. For an island the size of Aruba and for what was at stake it was a pretty close comparison. However, the Aruban Parliamentary election recount does not change results, MEP retains leadership with 11 seats. As reported by Aruba Today:

Aruban Parliamentary election recount does not change results MEP retains leadership with 11 seats ORANJESTAD – On Wednesday, a recount of last week’s September 23rd election votes was made in the Recount2presence of the leaders of all of the political parties concerned. Each vote was inspected for accuracy and blemishes. Any vote that had the slightest concern was thrown out of the overall count. The recall was made on the basis of a very close win of a seat in one of the newest parties joining the political arena. Other reasons were made and quickly disproved, but the recount concession was made to reinforce the accuracy of the Aruban electoral process. As a final result, MEP lead by Prime Minister Nelson Oduber remains with 11 seats, AVP lead by Mike Eman remains with 8 seats, MPA lead by the 1st female party leader Monica Kock Arends and RED lead by Father Lampe each remain with one for a total of 21 parliament seats. President of the electoral commission Hubert Maduro told Aruba Today that the vote counting system of Aruba is virtually error free. The only votes that were discarded in the recount were most likely made by elderly or those touching candidates with a pen mark either by accident or a personal system for making a decision, but clearly making a choice with a mark filling the space required.

One does speculate if these votes had changed and the “Real Democracy” candidate had won forcing the Aruban government to formulate a coalition government how this would have changed the perception and handling of the Natalee Holloway case and the PR campaign of any potential and alleged boycott? There is a big difference between one party rule with 11 seats and having to appease a coalition who may have many other different views and ideas. With the final election results in and MEP declared the victor, we will never know that answer either.

Posted September 29, 2005 by
Natalee Holloway, Politics | 8 comments


If you liked this post, you may also like these:

  • Natalee Holloway Investigation: What was Happening One Year Ago Today
  • Wisconsin State Supreme Court Election: The Final Ballot Count has Prosser Defeating JoAnne Kloppenburg by 7,316
  • Michelle’s interview with Beth Twitty
  • Natalee Holloway Weekend Posts
  • Natalee Holloway; June 21, 2005




  • Comments

    8 Responses to “2005 Aruban Election Recount; MEP Wins (Looks a bit like 2000 Florida Recount?)”

    1. Gabriel Leo on September 29th, 2005 1:14 pm

      SM let me make something clear to u and everyone. If the MEP party won, or the AVP party or any other party, the Nathalee Holloway case DID not PLAY ANY ROLE in this election. If it was the AVP that won no one can do anything to change the Holloway case. Power of government and power of legislation/law/justice are seperate and NO ONE, NEITHER the minister of JUSTICE or the PRime minister can not give an order to lock some one up. The can pressure the investigating authorities to move allong in this case but they can not, NO WAY NOT EVER decide if someone should remain locked up or should be released. That is something that Miss BETH Twitty/Holloway doesn’t want to understand. It can not be done on Aruba, it can not be done in the Netherlands Antilles and can not be done in the Netherlands. If that’s possible in the states I don’t know, but that’s your country and teh way you justice system works.

      Holloway case wasn’t, isn’t and never wil been a topic during the election or a election. People voted for the party which they beleive can solve the more important things that aruba has to handle. People over here have a life too.
      Why our election is now so important to you guys just amazes me.

    2. Mezcal on September 29th, 2005 2:06 pm

      Again… It would not make any difference. The Aruban government does NOT choose their judges or prosecutors. They are appointed by the Queen, not through elections or political appointments. If you are going to relate everything that happens on Aruba to the Holloway case, please get informed.

      http://www.aruba.com/pages/judicialsystem.htm

      Tells you all about it. So even IF or WHEN we get a new government, it would not change anything. Like it or not, these are the facts (you know facts…. things that are actually proven and checked)

    3. Scared Monkeys on September 29th, 2005 2:15 pm

      Gabriel,

      The reason why SM is interested in covering the Aruban election is before we covered the Natalee Holloway story and to date SM is a political blog. It would only seem right that if a political election was taking place that we cover it. Make no mistake about it GL, whether the politicians want to admit it or not, the fear of a alleged “boycott” was an issue to them. You think you want to be the ruling party if such an unfortunate thing occurred? Why so you think ArubaTruth blog was created and has not had a post on it since pre-election? Oh, that’s right they told us they weren’t about one political party even though the PM appointed people to it. Not like there have not been plenty of stories from MSM since the Dr Phil show.

      The reference to the Florida recount was meant light heartedly. The fact that your gov’t could have changed if 20 votes were different brings to light that many voter every where forget. Every vote counts and voting does matter.

      Its not like we covered any of the candidates or interjected ourselves in your politics. That being said politics, no matter where happens to fascinate us. We have posted on political happenings in many countries, especially the old former Soviet Republics.

      Gabe, sometimes a post is just a post, and seeing that we reported it to the US and abroad from an actual Aruban newspaper I would think that would give you solace.

      R

    4. Mezcal on September 29th, 2005 2:48 pm

      It is not about whether you cover it or not. It’s about the context in which you place it and the consequences you state, that the election could have for the NH case. And that answer is still NONE.
      There is no fear of any boycott over here! We survived 9-11, when there was not a single American prepared to fly, we have had tougher issues to deal with: Sars, Iraq war (thanks for electing Bush again by the way). And you know what… one day the media interest will fade away, people tend to forget and they will come back. But that is not the issue! This case has to get solved and right now this kind of publicity is not making anything better. You think I am going to feel anymore compassionate about this case if I see all those people shouting for a boycott? Telling flat out lies about Aruba? I think the hell with them, and the next time, some search team comes to my restaurant asking for a free meal to cut down the costs? I’ll give them the finger!
      The reason Arubatruth not posting is that at the time there are no new facts to this case, known to them or to us. They made the mistake to start commenting on the tv shows, but in a recent e-mail correspondence they made it clear, they would stop walking that road and simply put down the facts.
      The only reason Arubatruth has been established is to state the facts as they are. To my knowledge is none of the members appointed by the PM, and I’m very curious where you get this information from. I might be misinformed but it is to my understanding that this strategic force consists only of volunteers. Yes, there are people in it with a political background as well as Business men, bankers, members of the ATA, Arubans, Americans and Dutch.
      So don’t act as if this is just a “political post” because none of you would ever have been interested in Aruban government if it wasn’t for this case.

    5. Dave on September 29th, 2005 3:23 pm

      SM

      with all due respect do you honestly think that Beth Twitty telling people to not travel to Aruba is really going to make any difference to the total tourism of aruba?
      IMO the people who are saying they are not going to Aruba would not be going anyway.
      I think that rational people understand that crime happens anywhere including the USA.
      Check your facts re aruba bookings. There is no effect. They are booked to capacity or near capacity
      Check the facts re crime in other islands that would benefit from a boycott. Aruba is one of the safest overall carib islands to go to. Why should someone go to an even more unsafe island. Just how does that get Beth her daughter back???>?????? If you are supporting this boycott than you must belive that the Aruba govt knows where she is and has covered it up?
      Check the facts re the US Virgin Islands and their crime stats..
      That is why BH is so far off base it is beyond absurd…. This is about revenge for her and has ceased being about finding her daughter.

    6. Joaquin on September 29th, 2005 3:52 pm

      See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eduardo_Mathew For links to Court’s full opinion.

      Eduardo Mathew won his case today! His family called for a Boycott of Aruba last year:

      On September 29, 2005, Mathew won a judgment in his favor in the European Court of Human Rights for abuse in Aruba.

      On January 29, 2004, Dr. Arianna Mathew, called for a boycott due to her husband’s incarceration in prison with no (as she viewed it) justifiable or legal grounds. After his release, Eduardo Alexander Antonio Mathew, campaigned against alleged racism against black inmates and filed a lawsuit with the European Court of Human Rights.

    7. Scared Monkeys on September 29th, 2005 6:04 pm

      Mezcal,

      You are actually wrong on a couple of accounts and you may not have followed this blog from the beginning.

      1)you say,” So don’t act as if this is just a “political post” because none of you would ever have been interested in Aruban government if it wasn’t for this case.”

      Wrong, I have been going to Aruba for over 30 years. I happen to have met along the way some of you political leaders including the late Betico Croes. Met him several times. Have many friends and lived & worked in Aruba. What is the harm in reporting an election outcome? 20 votes possibly swinging a gov’t is a story.

      2) You said, “To my knowledge is none of the members appointed by the PM, and I’m very curious where you get this information from. I might be misinformed but it is to my understanding that this strategic force consists only of volunteers.”

      Maybe I say there are members appointed to the Task Force by the PM because the web site says there are. Have you ever actually been to it?

      From the Aruba Truth web page …
      Question: How has the task force interacted with the Aruban Government?
      Answer: The task force has been in contact with the Aruban Government on a daily basis. The task force has several members appointed by the Prime Minister and have
      been active in requesting more resources. The task force urged the inclusion of the Dutch Marines in the search and supported the Prime Minister in his decision to give the FBI a larger role in the investigation.

      http://www.arubatruth.com/2005/08/qa-arubas-assistance-regarding-natalee.html

    8. Gabriel Leo on September 30th, 2005 8:27 am

      I have to agree with Mezcal on this. Our Election was beeing watched by those who are against Aruba (wanting to Boycott Aruba). I can’t say with 100% certainty but Beth Holloway was trying to encourage bad publicity about the Ruling party MEP, not the Government of Aruba but MEP.
      Everyone wanted to see if the Arubans would have really voted against the Government due to the Holloway case. Where again I have to say that the Holloway case meant didly Squad! to the Aruban Elections. Why? because Government don’t rule the judicial System.
      And maybe Scared Monkeys is a Political Blog, I wouldn’t know, but you guys covering the Aruba election is just because the Holloway case is taking place over here. And also since this is a Political BLOG is the Holloway case a political one then?

      I am Happy that you knew/met Betico Croes and I am also happy that you have been coming to my island for the past 30 years. Maybe you even met some of my family members who founded the MEP party and who were and/ or are Ministers, Parliamentaries (congressman).

      You have your opinion why you covered our election and I have my opinion ;)

    Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

     
     
    • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
    • Red (comments)
    • Dugga (technical issues)
    • Dana (radio show comments)
    • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Close
    E-mail It