election

Dec. 24 (UPI) — Nasry Asfura, with backing by U.S. President Donald Trump, on Wednesday was declared the winner of Honduras’ presidential election that took place one month ago and included fraud allegations.

The 67-year-old right-wing candidate received 40.27% of the vote, with center-right Salvador Nasralla getting 39.53%. The margin was 28,000 votes out of 3.7 million for the election on Nov. 30.

Naralla, 72, served as vice president in the current Liberty and Refoundation, or Libre, but joined the right-wing Liberal Party in his fourth bid for president. Nasralla is a sportscaster and host of the long-running game show on television.

Asfura, nicknamed Tito and Papi, is a construction magnate and former mayor of Tegucigalpa, the capital, from 2014 to 2022.

“Honduras, we now have the official declaration from the CNE [electoral council],” he posted on X. “I recognise the great work carried out by the councillors and the entire team that ran the election. Honduras: I am ready to govern. I will not let you down. God bless Honduras.

His four-year term will begin Jan. 27.

The electoral council declared him the winner before finishing an audit.

There was a review of all tally sheets under “special scrutiny” last week to recount ballots flagged as Inconsistent.”

The electoral council comprised three councillors: one aligned with Asfura’s party, one with Nasralla’s and one with the party of the leftist president, Xiomara Castro, whose candidate finished third, Rixi Moncada, with 19.2%.

Only two councillors declared him the winner. The representative linked to the president’s party alleged that an “electoral coup” was underway and filed a complaint with the public prosecutor’s office.

Nasralla, refusing to concede, alleged fraud in the counting process, including “forgery of public documents,” claiming “the data from the original tally sheets were altered.” He made the allegations in a series of posts on X.

The results could be challenged in court.

“I have not found proof of widespread or large-scale fraud,” Hector Corrales, the director of the Honduran research institute NODO, who worked for the European Union’s electoral observer mission, said Tuesday.

But there already were doubts about the election integrity, he said.

“That will have an impact on the government’s credibility,” Corrales said. “And that is going to ruin his administration if he doesn’t know how to handle it.”

The top two candidates were different politically than the leftist Libre party, focusing on concerns about crime and corruption.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio posted on X: The people of Honduras have spoken: Nasry Asfura is Honduras’ next president. The United States congratulates president-elect Asfura and looks forward to working with his administration to advance prosperity and security in our hemisphere.”

Like Asfura, Nasralla also tried to appeal to Trump. His wife was seen wearing a MAGA hat.

A few days before the election, Trump publicly backed Asfura, and the United States would only support the next government if he won. He called the other leading candidates communists or allies of Venezuela’s dictator, Nicolas Maduro.

On the day before the election, Trump pardoned former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, who was sentenced to 45 years in U.S. prison for allegedly creating a “cocaine superhighway to the United States.”

He was president for eight years until Jan. 27, 2022.

Asfura says he is ready to govern after narrow vote as the US urges ‘all parties to respect the confirmed results’.

Nasry Asfura, a conservative candidate backed by United States President Donald Trump, has won the closely contested presidential elections in Honduras, the country’s election council has said.

The final results, announced on Wednesday – more than 20 days after the vote took place – are likely to lead to challenges in the Central American nation.

According to the electoral authority, known as the CNE, Asfura won 40.3 percent of the vote, edging out centre-right Liberal Party candidate Salvador Nasralla, who received 39.5 percent.

In a brief social media post, Asfura thanked the CNE on Wednesday. “Honduras: I am prepared to govern. I will not fail you,” he wrote.

Trump had come out strongly in support of Asfura, attacking Nasralla and left-wing candidate Rixi Moncada, who ended up garnering less than 20 percent of the votes.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was quick to congratulate Asfura on Wednesday, saying that Washington looks forward to working with him.

“The people of Honduras have spoken: Nasry Asfura is Honduras’ next president,” Rubio wrote in a social media post.

In a separate statement, Rubio urged “all parties to respect the confirmed results” of the elections.

Earlier this month, Trump pardoned former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez – a member of Asfura’s National Party – who was serving a lengthy prison sentence in the US for drug trafficking.

Asfura, the former mayor of Honduras’s capital, Tegucigalpa, is of Palestinian descent. But his National Party is staunchly pro-Israel.

Under Hernandez in 2021, Honduras became only the fourth country to move its embassy in Israel to Jerusalem in breach of international law. Asfura has also aligned himself with Trump and other right-wing leaders in the Americas, including Argentina’s Javier Milei.

The Argentinian president hailed Honduras’s election results on Wednesday, calling it a victory against “narcosocialism”, although the National Party’s Hernandez is a convicted drug trafficker.

“The Honduran people expressed themselves with courage at the ballot boxes and chose to end years of authoritarianism and decay,” Milei wrote in a social media post.

“From Argentina, we celebrate the triumph of freedom and reaffirm our commitment to democracy, the popular will, and the unrestricted respect for institutions in the region.”

Asfura’s victory marks another win for right-wing candidates in Latin America over the past year. Chile and Bolivia have also elected ultraconservative presidents in 2025, and last year, El Salvador’s right-wing leader Nayib Bukele comfortably won re-election.

The results appear to reverse the “Pink Tide” – the wave of left-wing leaders who rose to power in the region in the early 2020s.

The rise of right-wing governments in the region coincides with a US pressure campaign against Venezuela’s left-wing President Nicolas Maduro.

Trump has imposed an oil blockade on Venezuela and amassed US troops and military assets near the country.

DENVER — Just in time for the holidays, President Trump has issued another of his dubious pardons. Or rather, make that a “pardon.”

This one comes on behalf of a former Colorado elections official serving a nine-year sentence for election fraud.

“Democrats have been relentless in their targeting of TINA PETERS, a Patriot who simply wanted to make sure our elections were fair and honest,” Trump said in a typically gaseous, dissembling post on social media.

“Tina is sitting in a Colorado prison for the ‘crime’ of demanding Honest Elections,” the president went on. “Today I am granting Tina a full pardon for her attempts to expose voter fraud in the rigged 2020 Presidential Election.”

Actually, Peters’ crime was conspiring to let an unauthorized person access voting equipment as part of a nutty scheme to “prove” the November 2020 balloting was bogus, then lying and covering up her illegal actions.

And she’s not likely to leave jail anytime soon.

That’s because Trump has precisely zero say over Peters’ fate, given the former Mesa County elections chief was convicted on state charges. The president’s pardon power — which Trump has twisted to a snapping point — extends only to federal cases. If we’re going to play make-believe, then perhaps Foo-Foo the Snoo can personally escort Peters from prison and crown her Queen of the Rockies.

That’s not to suggest, however, that Trump’s empty gesture was harmless. (Apologies to Foo-Foo and Dr. Seuss.)

Some extremists, ever ready to do Trump’s malevolent bidding, have taken up Peters’ cause, using the same belligerent language that foreshadowed the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. In fact, threats have come from some of the very same thugs whom Trump pardoned in one of the first shameless acts of his presidency.

“WE THE PEOPLE ARE COMING TO BREAK TINA PETERS OUT OF PRISON IN 45 DAYS,” Jake Lang, a rioter who was charged with attacking police with an aluminum baseball bat, said on social media. “If Tina M. Peters is not released from La Vista Prison in Colorado to Federal Authorities by January 31st, 2026; US MARSHALS & JANUARY 6ERS PATRIOTS WILL BE STORMING IN TO FREE TINA!!”’

(Capitalization and random punctuation are apparently the way to show fervency as well as prove one’s MAGA bona fides.)

Enrique Tarrio, the former head of the Proud Boys extremist group whom Trump also pardoned, shared a screenshot of the president’s social media post. “A battle,” Tarrio said, “is coming.”

Trump’s pretend pardon is not the first intervention on Peters’ behalf.

In March, the Justice Department asked a federal judge to free her from prison, saying there were “reasonable concerns” about the length of Peters’ sentence. The judge declined.

In November, the administration wrote the Colorado Department of Corrections and asked that Peters be transferred to federal custody, which would presumably allow for her release. No go.

Earlier this month, apparently looking to up the pressure, the Justice Department announced an investigation of the state’s prison system. (Perhaps Peters was denied the special “magnetic mattress” she requested at her sentencing, to help deal with sleep issues.)

Like any child, when Trump doesn’t get his way he calls people names. On Monday, he set his sights on Colorado’s Democratic governor, Jared Polis — “a weak and pathetic man” — for refusing to spring Peters from state prison.

“The criminals from Venezuela took over sections of Colorado,” Trump said, “and he was afraid to do anything, but he puts Tina in jail for nine years because she caught people cheating.”

The only true part of that statement is that Colorado does, in fact, exist.

While Trump portrays Peters as a martyr, she is nothing of the sort.

As Polis noted in response to Trump’s “pardon,” she was prosecuted by a Republican district attorney and convicted by a jury of her peers — a jury, it should be noted, that was drawn from the citizenry of Mesa County. The place is no liberal playpen. Voters in the rugged enclave on Colorado’s Western Slope backed Trump all three times he ran for president, by margins approaching 2-to-1.

If Peters’ sentence seems harsh — which it does — hear what the judge had to say.

Peters was motivated not by principle or a search for the truth but rather, he suggested, vanity and personal aggrandizement. She betrayed the public trust and eroded faith in an honestly run election to ingratiate herself with Trump and others grifting off his Big Lie.

“You are as privileged as they come and you used that privilege to obtain power, a following and fame,” Judge Matthew Barrett told Peters in a lacerating lecture. “You’re a charlatan who used and is still using your prior position in office to peddle a snake oil that’s been proven to be junk time and time again.”

Peters remains unrepentant.

In petitioning Trump for a pardon, her attorney submitted nine pages of cockamamie claims, asserting that Peters was the victim of a conspiracy involving, among others, voting-machine vendors, Colorado’s secretary of state and the Venezuelan government.

To her credit, Peters has rejected calls for violence to set her free.

“Tina categorically DENOUNCES and REJECTS any statements or OPERATIONS, public or private, involving a ‘prison break’ or use of force against La Vista or any other CDOC facility in any way,” a post on social media stated, again with the random capitalization.

Perhaps the parole board will take note of those sentiments when the 70-year-old Peters becomes eligible for conditional release in January 2029, a date that just happens to coincide with the end of Trump’s term.

Which seems fitting.

Keep Peters locked up until then, serving as an example and deterrent to others who might consider emulating her by vandalizing the truth and attacking our democracy.

For the past 25 years, Somalia’s political transitions have not succeeded by accident. They were sustained through international engagement, pressure, and mediation aimed at preserving fragile political settlements. Today, however, Somalia stands at a dangerous crossroads. The federal government’s unilateral pursuit of power, cloaked in the language of democratic reform, threatens to trigger a legitimacy crisis and undo decades of political gains and international investment.

Universal suffrage is an ideal that all Somalis share. However, deep political disagreement among groups, persistent security challenges, the looming expiry of the government’s mandate, and financial constraints make the timely implementation of universal suffrage nearly impossible.

Pursuing universal suffrage without political consent, institutional readiness, or minimum security guarantees does not deepen democracy or sovereignty; it concentrates power in the hands of incumbents while increasing the risk of fragmentation and parallel authority.

Instead of addressing these constraints through consensus, the government is engaged in a power grab, deploying the rhetoric of universal suffrage. It has unilaterally changed the constitution, which forms the basis of the political settlement. It has also enacted self-serving laws governing electoral processes, political parties, and the Election and Boundaries Commission. Moreover, the government has appointed 18 commissioners, all backed by the ruling Justice and Solidarity Party (JSP).

Meanwhile, Somaliland announced its secession in 1991 and has been seeking recognition for the last three and a half decades. Most of Somalia’s national opposition, along with the leaders of Puntland and Jubbaland Federal Member States, have rejected the government’s approach and formed the Council for the Future of Somalia. These groups have announced plans to organise a political convention in Somalia, signalling their intent to pursue a parallel political process if the government does not listen.

The Federal Government of Somalia does not fully control the country. Al-Shabab controls certain regions and districts and retains the ability to conduct operations well beyond its areas of direct control. Recently, the hardline group attacked a prison located near Villa Somalia, a stark reminder of the fragile security environment in which any electoral process would have to take place.

Given the extent of polarisation and the limited time remaining under the current mandate, the international community must intervene to support Somalia’s sixth political transition in 2026. The most viable way to ensure a safe transition is to promote an improved indirect election model. Somalia’s political class has long experience with indirect elections, having relied on this model five times over the past 25 years. However, even with political agreement, the improved indirect election model for the 2026 dispensation must meet standards of timeliness, feasibility, competitiveness, and inclusivity.

The current government mandate expires on May 15, 2026, and discussions are already under way among government supporters about a unilateral term extension. This must be discouraged. If a political agreement is reached in time, some form of technical extension may be necessary, but this should only occur while the 2026 selection and election processes are actively under way. One way to avoid this recurring crisis would be to establish a firm and binding deadline for elections. Puntland, for example, has maintained a schedule of elections held every five years in January.

The improved indirect election model must also be feasible, meaning it should be straightforward to understand and implement. Political groups could agree on a fixed number of delegates to elect each seat. Recognised traditional elders from each constituency would then select delegates. Delegates from a small cluster of constituencies would collaborate to elect candidates for those seats. This system is far from ideal, but it is workable under current conditions.

Unlike previous attempts, the improved indirect election model must also be genuinely competitive and inclusive. In past elections, politicians manipulated parliamentary selection by restricting competition through a practice known as “Malxiis” (bestman). The preferred candidate introduces a bestman, someone who pretends to compete but is never intended to win. For the upcoming election, the process must allow candidates to compete meaningfully rather than symbolically. A clear threshold of “no manipulation” and “no bestman” must be enforced.

Inclusivity remains another major concern. Women’s seats, which should account for about 30 percent of parliament, have frequently been undermined. Any political agreement must include a clear commitment to inclusivity, and the institutions overseeing the election must be empowered to enforce the women’s quota. Government leaders have also arbitrarily managed seats allocated to Somaliland representatives. Given the unique political circumstances, a separate, negotiated, and credible process is required.

Finally, widespread corruption has long tainted Somalia’s selection and election processes, undermining their integrity. In 2022, the presidents of the Federal Member States managed and manipulated the process. To curb corruption in the 2026 improved indirect election model, one effective measure would be to increase the number of voters per seat by aggregating constituencies. In practice, this would mean combined delegates from several constituencies voting together, reducing opportunities for vote buying.

The international community has previously pressured Somali political actors to reach an agreement, insisting there should be “no term extension or unilateral elections by the government” and “no parallel political projects by the opposition”. This approach, combined with the leverage the international community still holds, can be effective. Somalia’s political class must again be pushed into serious, structured negotiations rather than unilateral manoeuvres.

As before, the international community should clearly define political red lines. The government must refrain from any term extensions or unilateral election projects. At the same time, the opposition must abandon plans for a parallel political agenda, including Federal Member States conducting elections outside a political agreement.

Somalis have repeatedly demonstrated their democratic aspirations. What stands in the way is not public will, but elite polarisation and the instrumentalisation of reform for political survival. At this critical moment, the international community cannot afford to retreat into passivity. Proactive and principled engagement is essential to prevent a legitimacy collapse, safeguard the gains of the past 25 years, and protect the substantial investments made in peacebuilding and state-building in Somalia.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

ATLANTA — Democrats will not issue a postelection report on their 2024 shellacking after all.

The Democratic National Committee head has decided not to publish a formal assessment of the party’s defeat that returned Donald Trump to power and gave Republicans complete control in Washington.

Ken Martin, a Minnesota party leader who was elected national chair after Trump’s election, ordered a thorough review of what went wrong and what could be done differently, with the intent they would circulate a report as Republicans did after their 2012 election performance. Martin now says the inquiry, which included hundreds of interviews, was complete but that there is no value in a public release of findings that he believes could lead to continued infighting and recriminations before the 2026 midterms when control of Congress will be at stake.

“Does this help us win?” Martin said in a statement Thursday. “If the answer is no, it’s a distraction from the core mission.”

Martin’s decision, first reported by the New York Times, spares top Democrats from more scrutiny about their campaigns, including former President Biden, who withdrew from the race after announcing his second-term run, and his vice president, Kamala Harris, who became the nominee and lost to Trump.

Keeping the report under wraps also means Martin does not have to take sides in the tug-of-war between moderates and progressives or make assessments about how candidates should handle issues that Trump capitalized on, such as transgender rights.

“We are winning again,” Martin said.

Martin’s announcement follows a successful string of 2025 races, both in special elections and off-year statewide votes, that suggest strong enthusiasm for Democratic candidates.

In November, Abigail Spanberger and Mikie Sherrill won races for governor in Virginia and New Jersey, respectively. In New York’s mayoral election, Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist, defeated establishment Democrat-turned-independent Andrew Cuomo.

In U.S. House special elections throughout 2025, Democratic nominees have consistently outperformed the party’s 2024 showing, often by double-digit percentages. Democrats have flipped state legislative districts and some statewide seats around the country, even in Republican-leaning places.

Although the DNC’s report will not be made public, a committee aide said some conclusions will be integrated into the party’s 2026 plans.

For example, the findings reflect a consensus that Democratic candidates did not adequately address voter concerns on public safety and immigration, two topics that Trump hammered in his comeback campaign. They also found that Democrats must overhaul their digital outreach, especially to younger voters, a group where Trump saw key gains over Harris compared with previous elections.

Barrow writes for the Associated Press.

Bangladeshi President Mohammed Shahabuddin, elected unopposed in 2023 as a nominee of the Awami League, has announced his intention to step down midway through his term following February’s parliamentary election. His decision comes amid tensions with the interim government led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus.

Although the presidency in Bangladesh is largely ceremonial, Shahabuddin gained national prominence during the student-led uprising in August 2024, when Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled to New Delhi and parliament was dissolved. During this period, Shahabuddin remained the last constitutional authority in the country.

Conflict with Interim Government

Shahabuddin described feeling sidelined by Yunus, citing instances such as being excluded from meetings, the removal of his press department, and the sudden elimination of his portraits from Bangladeshi embassies worldwide. “A wrong message goes to the people that perhaps the president is going to be eliminated. I felt very much humiliated,” he told Reuters in his first media interview since taking office.

Despite these grievances, he affirmed that he would remain in office until elections are held, respecting constitutional norms, and would allow the next government to determine his successor.

Political Landscape Ahead of Elections

Opinion polls suggest the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and hardline Jamaat-e-Islami are the leading contenders to form the next government. Shahabuddin has emphasized that no party has asked him to resign in recent months, and he maintains regular contact with Army Chief General Waker-uz-Zaman, who has assured him of no intention to seize power.

Military and Democratic Context

Bangladesh has a history of military intervention in politics, but Shahabuddin indicated that the army leadership is committed to democratic processes. During the August 2024 protests, the military largely stayed out of the conflict, which helped shape the political transition.

Personal Analysis

Shahabuddin’s planned resignation reflects a deeper struggle over the symbolic authority of the presidency amid political instability. Although the role is ceremonial, the treatment he received from the interim government appears to have eroded his sense of institutional respect. His public statements highlight not only personal frustration but also the fragility of democratic norms in transitional periods.

Furthermore, the situation underscores the delicate balance between civilian authority and the military in Bangladesh, where past interventions have shaped governance patterns. By signaling his willingness to step down while remaining constitutionally compliant, Shahabuddin seeks to preserve institutional legitimacy while avoiding direct confrontation, potentially smoothing the path for the incoming administration and reducing political friction in a tense electoral environment.

Overall, his resignation would mark a symbolic transition, emphasizing both the limitations of the presidency in Bangladesh’s political system and the ongoing influence of military and interim authorities in shaping the political landscape.

With information from Reuters.

Statement comes as regional body says no evidence of fraud in November vote that Trump-backed candidate Asfura leads.

The head of Honduras’s National Electoral Council (CNE) has decried acts preventing the ongoing recount of the Central American country’s presidential election, as a regional body said there was no reason to suspect fraud in the November 30 vote.

Ana Paola Hall’s statement on Monday came amid ongoing protests and unrest over the unresolved election. Nasry Asfura, a right-wing businessman publicly supported by US President Donald Trump, has held a razor-thin lead over his top opponent, Salvador Nasralla.

At least 99 percent of votes have already been counted, but CNE has said that nearly 2,800 ballots will need to be re-examined through a special recount.

In a post on X, Hall said disturbances seen in the country’s capital, Tegucigalpa, have “prevented the necessary conditions for the special recount to begin”.

Observers have said infighting at the CNE, which is run by three officials each representing one of the major political parties, has delayed reaching the final results.

Both Nasralla, a conservative, and outgoing left-wing President Xiomara Castro have alleged vote tampering, although several international missions have dismissed the claims.

On Monday, the Organization of American States (OAS), a regional body, said that despite a lack of expertise in overseeing the election, there was not “any evidence that would cast doubt on the results”.

The OAS mission “urgently calls on the electoral authorities to immediately begin the special recount and to explore all possible ways to obtain the official results as quickly as possible,” OAS official Eladio Loizaga said in a report he read to the group’s members.

“The current delay in processing and publishing the results is not justifiable,” he said in the report.

The OAS statement added that its mission of 101 observers from 19 countries “did not observe any malice or obvious manipulation of the electoral materials or computer systems”. The finding was in line with that of a parallel European Union mission.

The election in Honduras had been in turmoil even before polls opened, with several major parties, political figures, and foreign interference for months casting doubt on the election’s integrity.

The most prominent scandal involved an investigation by the attorney general into a member of Asfura’s National Party for allegedly discussing plans with a military officer to influence the vote.

The candidate for outgoing President Castro’s LIBRE party, Rixi Moncada, later told Reuters news agency that the alleged conspiracy proved the election was “the most rigged in history”.

Several candidates have also criticised the influence of Trump, who endorsed Asfura in the final stretch of the race and vowed to withhold US funding if his candidate did not win.

The US president also pardoned former Honduran President and National Party member Juan Orlando Hernandez, who had been convicted in the US of drug trafficking, two days before the vote.

Authorities in Honduras, a country of about 11 million, subsequently issued a fresh arrest warrant for Hernandez.

Far-right candidate Jose Antonio Kast has won a run-off election to become Chile’s 38th president, ousting the centre-left government currently in power.

On Sunday, with nearly all the ballots counted, Kast prevailed with nearly 58 percent of the vote, defeating former Labour Minister Jeannette Jara, a Communist Party politician who represented the governing centre-left coalition.

Jara and her coalition, Unity for Chile, conceded defeat shortly after the polls closed in the South American country.

“Democracy has spoken loud and clear. I have just spoken with President-elect [Kast] to wish him success for the good of Chile,” Jara wrote on social media.

“To those who supported us and were inspired by our candidacy, rest assured that we will continue working to build a better life in our country. Together and standing strong, as we always have.”

The result marks the latest victory for the far right in Latin America, which has seen a streak of right-wing leaders once considered political outsiders rise to power in countries like Argentina and Ecuador.

The tally also marks a significant comeback for Kast himself, the 59-year-old leader of the Republican Party. The 2025 election marks his third attempt to win the presidency — and his first successful bid.

During the last election, in 2021, he was trounced by outgoing President Gabriel Boric, who won by nearly a 10-point margin.

But Boric, a former student leader who became Chile’s youngest president, had seen his popularity slump to about 30 percent by the end of his four-year term. He was also ineligible to run for a second term under Chilean law.

In public opinion polls, voters also expressed frustration with recent spikes in crime and immigration, as well as a softening of Chile’s economy.

Kast, meanwhile, campaigned on the promise of change. He said he would address voter concerns by carrying out crackdowns on crime and immigration, including through a campaign of mass deportation, similar to what United States President Donald Trump has done in North America.

His security platform — dubbed the “Implacable Plan” — also proposes stiffer mandatory minimum sentencing, incarcerating more criminals in maximum security facilities, and putting cartel leaders in “total isolation” to cut them off from any communication with the outside world.

“Today, while criminals and drug traffickers walk freely through the streets, committing crimes and intimidating people, honest Chileans are locked in their homes, paralyzed by fear,” Kast writes in his security plan.

Kast has also taken a hard right stance towards social and health issues, including abortion, which he opposes even in cases of rape.

But those hardline policies earned Kast criticism on the campaign trail. Critics have also seized upon his own sympathetic comments about Chile’s former dictator, military leader Augusto Pinochet.

In 1973, Pinochet oversaw a right-wing military coup that ousted the democratically elected leader, Salvador Allende. He proceeded to rule the country until 1990. His government became known for its widespread human rights abuses and brutal oppression of political dissent, with thousands executed and tens of thousands tortured.

While Kast has rejected the label “far right”, he has repeatedly defended Pinochet’s government. Of Pinochet, Kast famously quipped, “If he were alive, he would vote for me.”

Opponents also sought to draw attention to Kast’s family ties: His father, Michael Martin Kast, was born in Germany and had been a member of the Nazi Party. The elder Kast immigrated to Chile in 1950.

Reporting from a polling site in the capital of Santiago, Al Jazeera correspondent Lucia Newman noted that Sunday’s victory was a historic one for Chile’s far right. But, she noted, Kast has sought to moderate his platform to better appeal to voters in the current election cycle.

“This is the first time since 1990 — since the military dictatorship before 1990, when Chile returned to democracy — that such a conservative government will be in power,” Newman explained.

“It’s really not certain just how conservative it will be. Jose Antonio Kast was a supporter of former dictator General Augusto Pinochet. He has shirked away from that in recent years, and certainly in this campaign.”

In the wake of Kast’s election victory, right-wing leaders from across the Americas offered their congratulations in statements on social media.

“Congratulations to Chilean President-Elect [Jose Antonio Kast] on his victory,” Trump’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote. “The United States looks forward to partnering with his administration to strengthen regional security and revitalize our trade relationship.”

Argentina’s libertarian leader Javier Milei likewise chimed in, hailing it as a major win for his conservative political movement.

“FREEDOM IS ADVANCING,” Milei wrote, echoing his own campaign rallying cry.

“Enormous joy at the overwhelming victory of my friend [Jose Antonio Kast] in the Chilean presidential elections! One more step for our region in defense of life, liberty, and private property. I am sure that we will work together so that America embraces the ideas of freedom and we can free ourselves from the oppressive yoke of 21st-century socialism…!!!”

Ecuador’s right-wing President Daniel Noboa, meanwhile, said that “a new era is beginning for Chile and for the region”.

This year’s presidential race was the first time since 2012 that voting had been compulsory in the country. There are approximately 15.7 million eligible voters in the South American country.

Kast originally came in second place during the first round of voting on November 16. He scored about 23.9 percent of the vote, compared with Jara’s 26.8 percent.

But polls had widely favoured him to win in the run-off. While Chile’s left wing held a primary in June and coalesced around its victor, Jara, right-wing parties did not hold a primary to choose a coalition nominee.

The result was a fractured right in the first round of voting. But in the final contest, Kast was able to sweep up votes that had previously gone to his right-leaning adversaries, earning him a comfortable win.

Still, Kast faces a divided National Congress, which is expected to blunt some of his more hardline proposals. Kast will be sworn in on March 11.

Dec. 14 (UPI) — Chileans head to the polls Sunday in a presidential runoff election in which the son of a Nazi party member, who has pledged to build a border wall to keep migrants out of the country, is the leading candidate.

Far right former congressman Jose Antonio Kast, 59, built his campaign on a promise to remove tens of thousands of undocumented migrants from the country. He faces Jeannette Jara, 51, a former labor minister in the administration of center-left president Gabriel Boric.

Jara, the leading candidate of the left-wing coalition, finished the first round of polling with 27%, but right-wing candidates, including Kast, secured more than half of the votes.

Kast is a known admirer of Chilean military strongman Augusto Pinochet, and a staunch opponent of abortion rights and same sex marriage.

The campaign has featured a bitter fight between Jara and Kast, with each attacking the other’s ability to address crime, migration problems and a lagging economy.

Jara has pledged to attract more investment in the country and to secure the border while also addressing health care needs. Kast has campaigned on corporate tax cuts, deregulation and departing undocumented migrants.

Both are using the approval rating of the outgoing Boric’s approval rating, hovering at 30%, as a platform for their campaigns, pledging to improve on the job he has done.

Chile has seen a sharp upturn in murder and other violent crime in recent years as international criminal groups have stepped into a country that has long been considered relatively docile.

The feat has spread to other Latin American countries, including Costa Rica and Ecuador.

Boric is considered to have failed to fulfill most of his stated agenda to strengthen public services. He also failed to address problems brought on by organized crime, election watchers have said.

Voters have called for more migration reform, tighter security and for the country to distance itself from Boric’s failed policies.

The U.S. Justice Department is suing four more states as part of its effort to collect detailed voting data and other election information across the country.

The department filed federal lawsuits against Colorado, Hawaii, Massachusetts and Nevada on Thursday, accusing them of “failing to produce statewide voter registration lists upon request.” So far, 18 states have been sued, including California, along with Fulton County in Georgia, which was sued over records related to the 2020 election, which President Trump continues to falsely claim he won.

The Trump administration has characterized the lawsuits as part of an effort to ensure the security of elections, and the Justice Department says the states are violating federal law by refusing to provide the voter lists and information about ineligible voters.

The lawsuits have raised concerns among some Democratic officials and voting rights advocates who question exactly how the data will be used, and whether the department will follow privacy laws to protect the information. Some of the data sought include names, dates of birth, residential addresses, driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers.

“States have the statutory duty to preserve and protect their constituents from vote dilution,” Assistant Atty. Gen. Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division said in a press release. “At this Department of Justice, we will not permit states to jeopardize the integrity and effectiveness of elections by refusing to abide by our federal elections laws. If states will not fulfill their duty to protect the integrity of the ballot, we will.”

Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, a Democrat, said her office declined to provide unredacted voter data.

“We will not hand over Coloradans’ sensitive voting information to Donald Trump. He does not have a legal right to the information,” Griswold said Thursday after the lawsuit was filed. “I will continue to protect our elections and democracy, and look forward to winning this case.”

Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar, also a Democrat, said the Justice Department hasn’t provided clear answers about how the data will be used, and he has a duty to follow state law and protect voters’ sensitive information and access to the ballot.

“While these requests may seem like normal oversight, the federal government is using its power to try to intimidate states and influence how states administer elections ahead of the 2026 cycle,” Aguilar said in a news release. “The Constitution makes it clear: elections are run by the states.”

In a Sept. 22 letter to the Justice Department, Hawaii Deputy Solicitor Gen. Thomas Hughes said state law requires that all personal information required on a voter registration district other than a voter’s full name, voting district or precinct and voter status must be kept confidential. Hughes also said the federal law cited by the Justice Department doesn’t require states to turn over electronic registration lists, nor does it require states to turn over “uniquely or highly sensitive personal information” about voters.

An Associated Press tally found that the Justice Department has asked at least 26 states for voter registration rolls in recent months, and in many cases asked states for information on how they maintain their voter rolls. In addition to California, other states being sued by the Justice Department include Michigan, Minnesota, New York, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. Nearly all the states are Democrat-led, and several are crucial swing states.

The bipartisan Wisconsin Elections Commission voted 5 to 1 on Thursday against turning over unredacted voter information to the Trump administration. The lone dissenter was Republican commissioner Robert Spindell, who warned that rejecting the request would invite a lawsuit. But other commissioners said it would be illegal under Wisconsin law to provide the voter roll information, which includes the full names, dates of birth, residential addresses and driver’s license numbers of voters.

Boone writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Scott Bauer in Madison, Wis., contributed to this report.

Dec. 12 (UPI) — The German Foreign Ministry said it summoned the Russian ambassador Friday after accusing Moscow’s military intelligence of a cyberattack on air traffic control and attempted election interference.

A spokesperson for the ministry said a hacker group behind the 2024 cyberattack likely has ties to GRU, Russia’s military intelligence.

“We can now clearly attribute the cyberattack against German Air Safety in August 2024 to the hacker collective APT28, also known as Fancy Bear,” the ministry said, according to Euronews.

The ministry also said it can be “definitively stated” that Russia attempted to interfere in February’s general elections in an attempt to undermine government institutions and processes.

A Russian propaganda group called Storm-1516 is accused of launching a targeted disinformation campaign to influence the election. The group allegedly spread misinformation about ballot manipulation, Green Party candidate Robert Habeck and now-Chancellor Friedrich Merz, the BBC reported.

“Russia is thus very specifically threatening our security,” the ministry added.

Dec. 11 (UPI) — President Donald Trump on Thursday said he granted “a full Pardon” to election denier Tina Peters who was convicted for helping outsiders illegally breach voting machine security, though Colorado officials say he has no power to do so for state crimes.

Peters, a 70-year-old former Mesa County, Colo., clerk, is serving a nine-year prison sentence. She was convicted in August 2024 of attempting to influence a public servant and criminal impersonation for aiding an unauthorized person in copying voting-machine hard-drive data during a 2021 software update.

That data, including sensitive election-system information, was later leaked online by election-fraud conspiracy theorists who claimed it proved Trump’s Big Lie that the 2020 election had been stolen from him.

While maintaining the unfounded claim that the 2020 election was stolen, Trump has been a vocal supporter of the effort to secure Peters’ release, describing Peters as a pro-democracy activist.

“Tina is sitting in a Colorado prison for the ‘crime’ of demanding Honest Elections,” Trump said Thursday evening in a post to his Truth Social account.

“Today I am granting Tina a full Pardon for her attempts to expose Voter Fraud in the Rigged 2020 Presidential Election!”

Colorado state officials have been adamant amid Trump’s demands for Peters’ release that he does not have the authority to pardon her, as she was convicted on state charges.

“Tina Peters was convicted by a jury of her peers, prosecuted by a Republican District Attorney and found guilty of violating Colorado state laws, including criminal impersonation,” Colorado Gov. Jared Polis said in a statement Thursday in response to Trump’s announcement.

“No President has jurisdiction over state law nor the power to pardon a person for state convictions,” Polis continued. “This is a matter for the courts to decide, and we will abide by court orders.”

Trump has feuded with Polis, a Democrat, over Peters’ incarceration, calling the governor a “SLEAZEBAG” earlier this month on Truth Social for refusing “to allow an elderly woman, Tina Peters, who was unfairly convicted of what the Democrats do, cheating on Elections, out of jail!”

Trump’s declaration of Peters’ pardon came hours after her lawyer, Peter Ticktin, announced he had formally asked Trump to pardon his client, whom he called “a necessary witness in exposing election misconduct.”

“Tina Peters is rightfully in Colorado state prison,” Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., said in a statement on X on Thursday.

“Trump’s corrupt and political attempts at a pardon won’t work here. Once again, if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.”

Since returning to the White House, Trump has used his powers to issue pardons to many of those connected to the effort to overturn the 2020 election who were convicted on federal charges, including the more than 1,500 people who stormed Congress on Jan. 6, 2021.