Reply #20: I quoted directly from one report and directly from the author of the second.

[struggle4progress]

The European report notes that opposition observers were not at the polls during the voting period; I provided a second link pointing out that they were not allowed at the polls during the voting period. I also directly quoted from the European report, the fact that voting was not secret. You are free to make of that what you choose; in the context of a country that has a genuine problem with death squads associated with the political establishment, the natural conclusion of a political opponent might be that an observed anti-government vote was potentially suicidal

The OAS author makes the comment I quote against the historical background, that in 2002 (for example) essentially no opposition campaigning was possible; that "some" was possible in 2006 is (in some sense) an improvement, though whether it represents enough of an improvement, that one should jump up and down cheering about it, is a rather different question

By nature, reports such as these are intended to encourage improvements; what they actually mean, must be judged from context

The turn-out in 2006 was low. I cited evidence that government acted to suppress the rural vote. Uribe may well have support among well-to-do city-dwellers; his support among the large population of displaced rural poor is a different question, not really answered by the election