Smartmatic revisited

In June 2003, the Venezuelan government bought through an intermediary, Omar Montilla Castillo, a 28% participation in a company called Bizta R&D Software C.A. for 300 million Bolivares [link]. Bizta was owned by Antonio Mugica and the late Alfredo Anzola, and was part of a consortium of companies (Smartmatic, Bizta, CANTV or SBC) contracted by Venezuela to automatise elections.

Smartmatic tries to improve online reputation

Google alerts is just such a fantastic tool, for it allows anyone with an interest on any given subject to be aware of information indexed by Google. While there is a lot that's being published nowadays, I find particularly interesting the fact that Smartmatic blogs are starting to appear, again. And I say again, because if memory serves well a similar online reputation management strategy was devised by Smartmatic employees in 2006. Given how rapidly this company gets into trouble, I reckon it won't be long before the current campaign is abandoned. Wikipedia entries, blogs and LinkedIn pages can't hide this type of information about Smartmatic.

Smartmatic sued in the Philippines

As expected, it hasn't taken long since elections for outraged Filipinos to sue Smartmatic for negligence, incompetence, corruption, and unethical behaviour, in violation to various legislations. René Azurin argues:

Charged by the PCS for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (R.A. 3019), the 1987 Constitution (Article XI, Section 1), the Government Procurement and Reform Law (R.A. 9184), the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards of Public Officials, and the Automated Election System Law (R.A. 9369) were Jose Melo, Gregorio Larrazabal, Rene Sarmiento, Nicodemo Ferrer, Armando Velasco, Elias Yusoph, Lucenito Tagle, Jose Tolentino, Ester Roxas and James Jimenez of Comelec; Anthony Roxas-Chua III, Timoteo Diaz De Rivera, and Denis Villorente of Comelec’s Technical Evaluation Committee; Cesar Flores and Heider Garcia of Smartmatic; and Jose Mari Antu_ez and Nilo Cruz of TIM. The respondents, according to the complaint, were guilty of "gross negligence and incompetence" and they "committed grave abuse of discretion resulting in the commission of ‘corrupt practices’ and ‘unethical conduct’."

More here. Thus another election in which Smartmatic is contracted under suspicious and apparently illegal circumstances, is marred with unreliable results, lack of transparency, corruption... So what else is new?

Threatened by Smartmatic's Marketing & Communications Coordinator

Act 1: an employee of Smartmatic, a technology company let's not forget, makes a threat in comment section of Daniel's blog, leaving his IP address (200.109.11.253).

Act 2: using a pseudonym (cmostaza), the same employee makes another comment, from the same IP address.

Act 3: Alek remembers comments of cmostaza in Twitter, and Googles "/coronel mostaza/" "/smartmatic/"

Act 4: Alek clicks on Google link and finds out that cmostaza is Luis Acuña.

Act 5: Alek Googles "/luis acuña/" "/smartmatic/" and finds, among other interesting bits, this (source) that identifies Luis Acuña as Smartmatic's Marketing & Communication Coordinator:

These are the 'efficient' people that run elections around the world, and are meant to keep biometric information safe. Scary. Mexican readers note: the threats from this "Dutch company" come from Caracas.

UPDATE: Luis Acuña, Smartmatic's Marketing & Communications Coordinator  has written to clarify his position. His comment follows:

Goof evening Mr. Boyd. It's true, I am Cmostaza, however I have not threatened you in anyway, that's pseudonym I use in the internet, it's not that hard to trace back to me as you have obviously demonstrated. Whatever I did, I did personally not representing the company, just today before leaving the comment in Daniel's blog I talked directly to you in Twitter, using my real name, I have nothing to hide. I admit writing comments on twitter and on the blog I however did not have anything to do with the e-mail you received earlier.

I assure you that even with our differences I do not condone violence in anyway. I have my points of views about yourself, but I would never stoop so low as to threaten a person. I am sorry to have fueled whatever fears you may have, and I am deeply sorry you believe either Smartmatic or myself could endorse such a repulsive action. All I asked was where was the threat which I did not (and still don't) see.

My reply: Mr. Acuña, thanks for dropping by and proving my point so quickly. You have indeed threatened me, by stating "I wonder if he can keep doing so and still get away with it." What exactly do you mean by "still get away with it"?

Is this how Smartmatic, according to you a company formed by "honest, hard working & talented professionals", deals with perfectly valid and sourced criticism? Will Smartmatic reprimand you because of this action?

Since you are Smartmatic's Marketing & Communications Coordinator, could you tell us:

1. in which countries of Europe has Smartmatic being contracted, as stated by Mr. Cook recently in Mexico? 
2. Where's the evidence that Smartmatic bought back from the Venezuelan government the shares it acquired through proxy Omar Montilla? 
3. Why did Smartmatic drop Sequoia and ran away from the CFIUS probe?
4. How come Smartmatic software continues to be in use in the USA through Sequoia? 
5. How much does Smartmatic gets from Sequoia for the use of its technology? 
6. What sort of professional relations has Jack Blaine with Smartmatic? 
7. Did Smartmatic applied for working permits for the Venezuelans that were flown to monitor elections in Chicago in 2006? 
8. Why did Smartmatic/Sequoia machines did not perform adequately in Chicago? 
9. Could you please provide us with evidence of independent audits that have been carried out in Smartmatic voting equipment and biometric technology?
10. Why have Venezuelans not been informed of the final results of the constitutional referendum of 2007? 
11. Can Smartmatic provide evidence of having been contracted in open, transparent and fair public tenders in Venezuela? 
12. Since 2003, how much money have the honest folks that run Smartmatic taken from the Chavez regime? 
13. How much in taxes has been paid to SENIAT?
14. Where's the rest of the money stashed?
15. Why did the "decent, righteous and capable" Antonio Mugica threaten former employees? 
16. How did Smartmatic manage to get the contract in the Philippines? 
17. Why did Smartmatic access servers remotely during a regional election in Mindanao, Philippines? 
18. Do Smartmatic machines maintain bidirectional communication with polling stations during voting in the Philippines, as it does in Venezuela? 
19. Where does Smartmatic pays its taxes? 
20. Is Smartmatic prepared to show its last returns? 
21. Whatever happen to the investigation into the death of Alfredo Anzola? 
22. Why did Jorge Rodriguez, acting at the time as Venezuela Electoral Council Chief, go to Italy to close the deal with Olivetti on behalf of Smartmatic?
23. Who pocketed the +$20 million overprice? 
24. Why did Smartmatic pick up the tab of luxury holidays of Jorge Rodriguez? 
25. Why has Smartmatic got such a convoluted ownership structure? 
26. Is Smartmatic prepared to publish a full disclosure of its activities, employees, financial operations? 
27. How come Smartmatic was illegally subcontracted by NEC Argentina in Bolivia, for the provision of biometric technology, considering that its bid was rejected by Bolivian electoral authorities? 
28. How come Bolivia's electoral roll increased its numbers, once Smartmatic got involved? 
29. What was the issue between TIM and Smartmatic in Philippines? 
30. How did Smartmatic manage to get into a public tender for the provision of biometric technology in Mexico, when it lacks a track record on the provision of such services anywhere in the world? 
31. Why did Smartmatic use contact details of a collaborator of Fernando Gómez Mont to register its bid? 
32. Did Smartmatic pay any bribes in Mexico? 
33. If so, how much and to whom? 
34. What's Smartmatic position on similar allegations made in the Philippines?
35. And in Bolivia? 
36. Who controls the totalisation room of the CNE in Venezuela? 
37. Is it true, as Gen. Raul Baduel said to me, that monitors have been placed in a Venezuelan military compound (CUFAN), so that the army can follow in real time how elections are going and act accordingly upon being ordered by Chavez? 
38. Is Antonio Mugica in any way related to Venezuela Ambassador to the USA Bernardo Alvarez Herrera? 
39. Was the late Alfredo Anzola related to Mr. Alvarez Herrera? 
40. Why did documents of incorporation of SBC disappear, from the notary office of Jose Vicente Rangel's daugher in Cubo Negro, upon publication of Richard Brand's article in the Miami Herald? 
41. Whatever happened with the investigation for tax evasion that US authorities were conducting on Smartmatic? 
42. How about the one from the FBI? 
43. Has Smartmatic developed any expansion plans into ALBA countries? 
44. When will Smartmatic start operations in Cuba? 
45. Finally, you say you don't condone violence in any way. How come you work for a company that rigs elections for a militaristic putschist then? 
46. Where were you when you made those comments and threats, at home, or at work? 
47. Did you do it following instructions from above? 
48. If so, who told you to slander/threaten me? 
49. Why did you hide behind different pseudonyms? 
50. Is that your idea of honesty, and transparency?

I take you're well placed, sufficiently knowledgeable -since you have know Smartmatic since 2001, and eager to answer this set of questions, that will help dispel somewhat the apprehensions that many people and authorities have towards Smartmatic around the world. I will advice caution in replying, while stressing upon one maxim: "shooting the messenger never works".

Is Smartmatic issuing threats now?

For future reference, and before further investigating the IP address from where comment was sent, I would like to leave a public record of a veiled threat that an alleged Smartmatic employee has made, in the comment section of this post:

I happen to WORK for Smartmatic, which I got acquainted with back in 2001. I KNOW about voting systems (which Mr. Alek Boyd does not). I KNOW the owners of this company personally (which Mr. Alek Boyd does not, either, he insists on saying the owner is Hugo Chavez, which is a lie), and I believe they are honest, hard-working & talented professionals (which Mr. Alek Boyd is not and will never be). I am revolted at the lightness whith which Mr. Alek Boyd tells lies and more lies, accusing Smartmatic of sins which he has never supplied any evidence of, and accusing Smartmatic's technology --which he doesn't know anything about-- of ills that exist only in his imagination. The only purpose Mr. Alek Boyd seems to have is to inflict as much harm as he can to a decent, righteous and capable company and the hard-woking, talented people it hires. That purpose seems to have sponsors, most probably to be found among those companies who have lost important bids and contracts to Smartmatic, and now want blood. So, it is apparent that Mr. Boyd has found a reliable source of income --as long as he keeps spitting his venom at Smartmatic. I wonder if he can keep doing so and still get away with it.

This is not the first time this has happened, and it won't be the last. For that's the only thing chavistas excel at, threatening and terrorising people. Fortunately, for my wellbeing, I live in London, and not in Caracas, where my life could be dispensed with rather easily, and make the whole thing look as another example of common crime. I won't delve in debunking the message, for Smartmatic is doing a stellar job in fuelling all sorts of conspiracy theories themselves, by, for instance, having refused to open up when a CFIUS probe was launched. I am afraid that it's Smartmatic that needs to clear its past, not me. I have no relations with dictators, and, most certainly, I have never taken more than a $100 million to provide services to militaristic caudillos.

An update: the IP address of the Smartmatic employee is 200.109.11.253 (DISTRITO FEDERAL, CARACAS, CANTV SERVICIOS VENEZUELA)

Mexico mulls over Smartmatic

The email read: "Hi Alek, tomorrow one of the companies in Mexico is presenting a claim against Smartmatic and they need to know if Smartmatic Holding (the one registered in the Netherlands) has modified their statement regarding their activities, where they say they are dedicated to trading real estate. According to your info, in 2005 they formed this holding company, but if they haven't modified it to include the sale and installation of voting equipment and manufacture and sale of ID cards, then they can be banned from the bid. This is what my friend's company wants to do, but they just want to make sure no change has been made to their statement of activities since 2005. Do you think you can help us in this matter? Again, thanks for all your help and patience." Upon reading it, I thought that this was a chance to make Smartmatic come clean. So I did call Amsterdam Register of Companies, and I did find out that Smartmatic has not modified its purpose. As far as records in Amsterdam show, Smartmatic International Holding B.V.'s purpose continues to be "to purchase, develop and manage property and goods."

The granting of the contract to Smartmatic is being challenged in Mexico, almost unanimously: by some of the companies that took place in the tender, by representatives from the major political parties (PRI, PAN and PRD), authorities, and by the media, among others. Of particular concern the finding about Smartmatic's possible connection to the authorities granting the contract, a practice in which Smartmatic has engaged in Venezuela, Chicago, Bolivia, and the Philippines.

Furthermore, authorities have postponed signing of contract with Smartmatic, due 3 December, until the Comptroller's Office announces its decision. Worse still, Smartmatic's damage limitation attempt is also being challenged. In light of all this, Mexico would do well in sending Smartmatic packing back to Venezuela.

Smartmatic's PR disaster

Presumably intent in doing damage limitation, Smartmatic dispatched a couple of executives to Mexico City to brief the press about the mounting suspicions regarding its operations, and the way in which it had won a tender for the provision of biometric technology. Robert Cook and Jim Bell, quoted by the Mexican press as Smartmatic's representatives, stated today that the company has "participated in electoral processes in 70 countries... have never been sued by any government... and that President Obama voted using Smartmatic technology." These three statements merit further scrutiny:

1. It would be great, for Smartmatic's own credibility sake, if Messieurs Cook and Bell can provide a list of the 70 countries in which Smartmatic has, succesffully, participated. Of particular interest, commercial operations in European countries where Smartmatic has been involved, according to Cook.
2. Smartmatic has never been sued by any government. However, how could one interpret the investigation launched in Chicago in 2006, after local authorities found out that Smartmatic-operated Sequoia machines "did not perform adequately"? Moreover, what to make of Smartmatic's decision to drop Sequoia Voting System to prevent further investigations from CFIUS into its ownership structure, and ties to the Chavez regime?
3. President Obama voted using Smartmatic technology. Does that mean that Smartmatic continues to provide technology to Sequoia Voting Systems, despite the fact that it announced that is was selling it?

Smartmatic does Mexico

In spite of having won contracts worth millions of dollars in different countries, Smartmatic seems incapable of shaking allegations that mar its reputation. And the reason is quite simple: the more business it gains, the greater the lack of transparency. Take for instance what has recently happened in Mexico, where the government is planning to gather biometric data to produce ID cards. A tender was organised by the Mexican government and the following companies submitted bids: LATIN ID S.A. de C.V., MAINBIT S.A. de C.V.; SOLTIC S.A. de C.V.; and, the grand sounding, Smartmatic International Holding, B.V.

Smartmatic won the tender to provide such technology, despite having submitted the highest bid. Smartmatic mislead Mexican authorities, by presenting itself as a Dutch company. I happen to have dug the records of Smartmatic in the Netherlands some years ago, their activities are described as "to purchase, develop and manage property and goods". There's nothing about provision of biometric devices in there. As a matter of fact, Smartmatic has no track record of having been directly contracted to provide such technology anywhere in the world. In Bolivia, a province of Hugo Chavez, Smartmatic managed to get subcontracted by a company from Argentina, another province of Hugo Chavez, called NEC Argentina, to gather biometric data destined for the electoral roll. But even that process has been marred with irregularities. The Bolivian press reports that Smartmatic's initial offering was rejected due to its participation in fraudulent elections in Venezuela.

But Smartmatic irregularities do not end there. Company records show that, just weeks before Smartmatic won its first contract in Venezuela, Antonio Mugica and the late Alfredo Anzola (Smartmatic and Bizta principals), took Bs.300 million ($187,000) from a subsidiary of a Venezuelan government entity called FONCREI. It is this information which would probably have caused the decision by Smartmatic of 'selling' Sequoia Voting Systems to avoid a proper investigation from CFIUS into its ownership structure. To this day, Smartmatic is to present credible evidence of having repurchased the stock acquired by the Venezuelan government.

Then there's is the issue in the Philippines, where, yet again, Smartmatic misrepresented itself in order to win an electoral contract. In addition, it was revealed that Smartmatic technicians remotely accessed servers during a regional election in Mindanao.

So there's a few simple questions that Mexican citizens should be posing to authorities:

1. Why is a company that has no record in the provision of biometric technology allowed to enter bids in a public tender organised to that effect?
2. In light of previous question: why have Mexican authorities granted the contract to the highest and least experienced bidder?
3. Why has Smartmatic misrepresented itself, alleging that is a Dutch company, when is in fact a Venezuelan one with suspect connections to the Chavez regime?
4. If it is true that Smartmatic is a Dutch corporation, where are the tax returns from operations in that country?

Smartmatic a Dutch company?

News don't get anymore surreal than this: Mexico has just granted a $23 million contract to Smartmatic, which is now meant to be a Dutch company, to provide biometric technology needed to produce ID cards. To be frank, I am puzzled at the commercial ability of Antonio Mugica. He seems to share the 'business acumen' of Ricardo Fernandez Barrueco, mind individuals that only a decade ago couldn't afford a roll of toilet paper being awarded now contracts worth millions of dollars everywhere. For the Mexican contract comes after the Filipino one, where Smartmatic was awarded $150 million.

But what strikes as completely ignorant is how Mexican media are describing Smartmatic as a Dutch company, when it is public knowledge that the company decided to dispose of Sequoia, and obstruct a CFIUS investigation into its convoluted ownership structure, after its connections to the Venezuelan regime were exposed. To be certain, Smartmatic is as Dutch as Hugo Chavez. And to go a bit further, Smartmatic is yet to run the first truly transparent and problem-free election -only field in which the corporation does have a record.

Smartmatic does the Philippines

One of the reasons I have stopped blogging regularly about Venezuela is that everything that I felt I needed to expose I have already. Be it Eva Golinger lies about tax status, credentials or relations with the Chavez regime, the non existence of records of Chavez's favorite pollsters, the evident conflict of interests between Smartmatic and the Venezuelan government, or the family links that unite peddlers of baseless allegations and the regime led by the putschist, I feel I have done my share.

In the past few days I have noticed an increased amount of visits to one of my websites from the Philippines. So I got curious and investigated a bit further about it, sadly to find out that the firm that has rigged elections for Chavez since 2004 in Venezuela, the firm whose acquisition of Sequoia Voting Systems in the USA was challenged on the basis of an electoral fiasco in Chicago, has been contracted, to the tune of $150 million, by the Filipino electoral watchdog to run elections in 2010.

Filipinos will soon find out the sort of democracy Hugo Chavez e-voting firm provides.