Ecuador 2025 Presidential Election
February 9, 2025 – April 13, 2025
Daniel Noboa and Luisa González finished the first round only 16,746 votes apart, but Noboa won the runoff by more than 1.18 million votes, 55.63% to 44.37%. González alleged fraud and sought review. The evidence record does not support result falsification: EU observers called the runoff transparent and well organized, the results site published 90% of tally sheets within three hours, and an OAS random comparison of questioned tally images with the computerized totals found no irregularities or inconsistencies. The same observers still documented an uneven contest, especially incumbent advantage and government communication.
Official results
First round, 9 February
- Daniel Noboa — National Democratic Action44.2%4,527,606
- Luisa González — Citizen Revolution–RETO44%4,510,860
Runoff, 13 April
- Daniel Noboa — National Democratic Action55.6%5,870,618
Re-elected
- Luisa González — Citizen Revolution–RETO44.4%4,683,260
The Integrity Ledger
What the evidence establishes, and what it does not — side by side, each finding sourced and tiered.
What is established
- Process violationsCorroborated
Incumbency and government communication created an uneven campaign environment.
More detail
The EU mission identified advantages linked to the sitting president's office, including campaign-period presidential activity and government advertising. Its priority recommendations called for limiting government and presidential activity to current affairs or emergencies and strengthening controls on institutional communication. These imbalances matter even though observers found election-day voting and counting transparent.
Sources:1 - Information operationsCorroborated
Fraud narratives circulated before and after the runoff without objective support in the records observers reviewed.
More detail
The losing ticket alleged fraud on election night, and fraud narratives circulated through the campaign. EU and OAS observers tested the allegations against direct observation, publication systems and tally-sheet images and did not find supporting evidence.
What is not established
- Result falsificationDebunked
Observer review found no evidence that questioned tally sheets were changed in the computerized result.
More detail
The OAS mission randomly selected questioned tally-sheet images and compared them with the CNE results system without finding irregularities or inconsistencies. The EU mission likewise found no objective elements supporting fraud accusations after observing both rounds and the post-election period.
- Statistical anomaliesDebunked
A small number of ink-transfer cases did not amount to systematic ballot invalidation.
More detail
The OAS observed isolated cases where ink marked a folded ballot, but nearly all were resolved at the polling board in front of both tickets' representatives. It found very few affected ballots, no systematic intent and no scale capable of affecting the result.
Sources:1
Process assessment
Election-day administration, counting and electronic publication were transparent and traceable, and direct observer checks did not support the fraud allegation. The broader contest was not perfectly level: the incumbent's dual role and public communication produced documented advantages. Result integrity and campaign fairness therefore receive different assessments rather than one all-purpose verdict.