Peru and Colombia differ in the time taken to count votes; understand

Peru held elections on April 12, but the results with the names of those who would go through to the second round, which will be held this Sunday (7), were only known five weeks later.

Colombia had elections on May 31st and it only took two hours to know who would advance to the second round on June 21st. What is this contrast due to?

Analysts consulted by CNN state that this is due to factors such as differences in the design of the electoral processes in the two countries and different levels of distrust in institutions, in addition to pointing out similarities in both disputes and highlighting the importance they will have in shaping the political map of Latin America.

Why did Peru take time and Colombia didn't?
A first factor that explains the contrast between the elections in Peru and Colombia is the way they are organized, said Daniel Zovatto, director of Radar Latam 360.

In Peru, recalled Zovatto, on April 12, president, senators, deputies and representatives of the Andean Parliament were elected. In Colombia, on May 31, the elections were only presidential, as voting for the Senate and Chamber of Representatives had taken place in March.

Holding several elections in a single day usually makes the counting process slower, and in the case of Peru this was compounded by the fact that, in the first round, there were a record 35 candidates for president. In Colombia, there were 13 applications.

In addition, in Peru there were logistical problems that caused delays in the delivery of electoral material and the opening of some voting centers. For these reasons, the JNE (National Elections Jury) took the extraordinary decision to extend the hours of polling stations on Sunday and even allow some to be set up on Monday.

All these incidents, along with challenges to numerous minutes, delayed the investigation.

Only on May 15 did ONPE (National Office of Electoral Processes) complete 100% of the count. Two days later, the JNE proclaimed Keiko Fujimori, from Fuerza Popular, and Roberto Sánchez, from Juntos por el Perú, as the candidates who advanced to the second round and among whom the country's next president will be chosen as of July 28.

"In the case of Peru, the electoral process of the first round was very complicated, with many complaints and great judicialization. The same did not happen in Colombia, where the process was well organized, flowed well and, at the same time, the data was transmitted very quickly", said Zovatto.

In Colombia, since the night of May 31 it was known that the far-right candidate Abelardo de la Espriella and the government candidate Iván Cepeda would advance to the second round, according to the preliminary results released by the Registraduría Nacional.

Lucas Martínez-Villalba, professor at Tecnológico de Monterrey, added another element to the analysis. According to the academic, while Colombian institutions have acquired experience in electoral processes, those in Peru have been affected by the country's own political instability, which has had eight presidents in the last 10 years.

"It seems to me that, in the Peru model, precisely this lack of stability, including presidential stability, generates a situation in which elections also suffer from a lack of institutionality, and this puts the entire electoral system in difficulties, in the sense that elections take place very frequently and in an environment of great distrust regarding the results", he said.

What factors and challenges do both elections share?
Although the elections have differences, especially in the time it took to know the results, they also have similarities. One of them, said Zovatto, is that in both elections there were reports of alleged fraud.

In Peru, the complaint came from Rafael López Aliaga, a right-wing Popular Renewal candidate, who came in third place and was competing with Roberto Sánchez for a place in the second round.

In Colombia, the complaint came from President Gustavo Petro, who rejected that Abelardo de la Espriella was the competitor with the most votes. However, neither López Aliaga nor Petro provided proof of their allegations.

Another similarity, according to the expert, is that both elections are "extremely polarized" and show a clear phenomenon of "voting against", whether in rejection of the legacy of the late former president Alberto Fujimori, father of Keiko Fujimori and who governed Peru from 1990 to 2000, or the proposals of Petro, who will conclude his term in office on August 7 in Colombia.

"In one case, it is the anti-fujimorism vote, although Fujimori is not in the government; in the other, it is an anti-Petro vote, although Petro is not on the ballot, but rather whether or not there is continuity with Petro's project, and in the other it is whether or not there is a return of Fujimorism via Keiko", explained Zovatto.

To these elements is added another similarity: scenarios of great uncertainty, in which the second round may present tight results.

Keeping an eye on this Sunday's vote in Peru, Martínez-Villalba commented: "I can anticipate that, from what the polls indicate, where there is also a very narrow margin between the two candidates, it is very likely that something similar will happen, that it will take a while for there to be an official result and, if the margin remains so tight, whoever is not recognized will probably try to challenge these elections."

And this same conflict scenario, said the academic, is also expected for the second round in Colombia.

What messages do Peru and Colombia send to Latin America?
Peru is not the only country in the region where the results of recent elections were slow to be announced. At the end of 2025, Honduras took almost a month for the CNE (National Electoral Council) to declare the right-wing candidate Nasry Asfura the winner of the presidential election.

Martínez-Villalba considered that cases like these are examples of the high polarization that prevails in Latin American countries, which, in turn, generates distrust among political and social actors towards institutions and causes them to take longer to announce a result.

"What really draws attention is the distrust in institutions that we are seeing in Latin America," said the expert. In this context of polarization, he added, the group that loses an election "will necessarily question these results".

"This means that institutions will have to make a much more careful effort to present a credible result. It will take time, of course. This is the reality we see in Honduras and will probably be the same in Peru," he argued.

Zovatto, in turn, emphasized the importance of the results of the elections in Peru and Colombia, as well as the elections in Brazil, which will be held in October, because they will create a new balance of forces in the region, where governments led by right-wing politicians - many of them close to the United States - have gained ground in recent years.

"These are electoral processes that, over the next four months, will finish redefining the political map of Latin America, a map that is tilting to the right", said the expert.

Source: CNN