Corruption (Institutional)

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Ecuador está en crisis, pero hay maneras de salir

      by

      Pedro Briones, candidato al Congreso y líder político en Ecuador, fue asesinado el lunes. El ataque se produjo a unos días de que Fernando Villavicencio, candidato presidencial y firme crítico de la corrupción, fuera asesinado al salir de un mitin de campaña en Quito, la capital del país. Las muertes, tan cercanas a las elecciones generales de Ecuador previstas para el domingo, han conmocionado a los ecuatorianos y han suscitado la condena mundial. La ola de violencia demuestra que nadie, ni siquiera un candidato presidencial, está a salvo en Ecuador.Christian Zurita, periodista de investigación, excolega y amigo cercano de Villavicencio, será su reemplazo en la contienda. Y aunque lo que sucederá el domingo es incierto, algo está claro: la intensa polarización política de Ecuador no ayudará a resolver esta crisis.El homicidio de Briones está siendo investigado y seis ciudadanos colombianos fueron detenidos en conexión con el homicidio de Villavicencio. La manera en que el sistema de justicia penal ecuatoriano gestione las investigaciones en curso será una prueba de fuego para el país.Los políticos ecuatorianos y sus aliados internacionales deberán reunir la voluntad política y los recursos necesarios para llevar a cabo una investigación seria e independiente de los asesinatos. Si las autoridades se limitan a procesar a unos cuantos sicarios y dejan las cosas como están, las organizaciones criminales se atreverán a más. Pero si toman el camino más largo y difícil —descubrir y llevar ante la justicia a los autores intelectuales de los homicidios y sacar a la luz los vínculos del crimen organizado con partes del Estado—, puede que el país tenga una vía para no caer en el abismo.Como politólogo especializado en América Latina, he vivido y trabajado en países como Colombia y Guatemala, donde hace décadas las pandillas y los grupos de delincuencia organizada empezaron a sembrar el caos a medida que se hacían más poderosos. Aunque Ecuador había logrado eludir la violencia impulsada por el narcotráfico y los conflictos armados internos que asolaron a sus vecinos sudamericanos durante la segunda mitad del siglo XX, tiene todas las características para convertirse en un paraíso para los narcotraficantes. El país se encuentra ubicado entre Perú y Colombia, los dos mayores productores de hoja de coca en el mundo. Además, desde el año 2000, la economía ecuatoriana usa dólares como moneda legal, lo que la hace atractiva para el lavado de dinero.La desmovilización en 2017 de las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (Farc), que durante mucho tiempo controlaron las rutas de narcotráfico ecuatorianas, creó un vacío que los nuevos cárteles y pandillas intentan llenar. A principios de este año, fui testigo de cómo la violencia está reescribiendo las reglas de la vida cotidiana ecuatoriana. La tasa de homicidios de Ecuador es ahora la cuarta más alta de América Latina y la extorsión ha aumentado a un ritmo alarmante. Como consecuencia, las calles, antes llenas de vida, lucen inquietantemente vacías y los comercios han empezado a cerrar más temprano. Un día, vi cómo un comerciante y sus clientes se agolpaban alrededor de un teléfono para ver y aplaudir videos de justicia por mano propia contra presuntos pandilleros. Muchas personas con las que hablé me contaron que planeaban migrar. Desde octubre, más de 77.000 ecuatorianos han llegado a la frontera entre México y Estados Unidos, un aumento de casi ocho veces desde 2020.Los desatinos políticos han dejado a Ecuador mal equipado para hacer frente a la espiral de violencia. Rafael Correa, presidente entre 2007 y 2017, cometió los primeros errores importantes. Es cierto que algunas medidas implementadas por su gobierno ayudaron a reducir los homicidios a niveles bajos. Pero Correa también eliminó la unidad policial de investigaciones especiales, cerró una base militar estadounidense que suministraba equipo para vigilar su espacio aéreo y sus vastas aguas territoriales y duplicó la población carcelaria, lo que creó un caldo de cultivo para las pandillas. Sus sucesores también cometieron errores garrafales.Durante el gobierno del expresidente Lenín Moreno funcionarios en los poderes ejecutivo y judicial que habían sido nombrados por Correa fueron destituidos, y un referendo reinstauró los límites a los mandatos presidenciales eliminados por su predecesor. El poder judicial abrió investigaciones por corrupción durante los años de Correa y la polarización estalló entre los correístas, que afirmaban ser víctimas de una justicia politizada, y sus opositores, como Moreno, que sostenían que estaban reconstruyendo los pesos y contrapesos democráticos erosionados durante la presidencia de su antecesor. Mientras se gestaba esta lucha política, las pandillas convirtieron las cárceles sobrepobladas en sus centros de mando y empezaron a infiltrarse en las instituciones gubernamentales y las fuerzas armadas.Guillermo Lasso, el actual presidente, libra una batalla con los seguidores de Correa en la Asamblea Nacional, que Lasso disolvió por decreto en mayo. También ha decretado diversos estados de emergencia e incluso desplegó soldados en las calles para combatir a las pandillas y los carteles. Sin embargo, el control de los grupos criminales sobre el país solo ha aumentado. Resulta inquietante que el cuñado de Lasso, quien fue uno de sus asesores cercanos, esté siendo investigado por presuntos vínculos con la mafia albanesa. En marzo, un empresario implicado en el caso fue encontrado muerto.Un simpatizante mostrando un volante de Villavicencio durante una protesta un día después del asesinato del candidato.Carlos Noriega/Associated PressEl auge de la delincuencia en Ecuador es transnacional, pues los cárteles mexicanos, grupos colombianos y venezolanos, así como la mafia albanesa compiten por controlar el narcotráfico en el país y debilitar al Estado. Para frenar el poder de la delincuencia organizada y la violencia, las autoridades deben erradicar la corrupción, investigar los vínculos con los políticos locales y nacionales y perseguir a sus lavadores de dinero y contactos en el Estado.Esto es mucho pedir para un país cuyas instituciones están cada vez más cooptadas por la delincuencia. Requerirá la cooperación permanente y el valor de la policía, los fiscales, los jueces y los políticos del país. Pero ya se ha hecho antes. Colombia podría ser un ejemplo a seguir. A partir de 2006, el gobierno de ese país empezó a tomar medidas para investigar, procesar y condenar a más de 60 miembros del Congreso que ayudaron e instigaron a los paramilitares narcotraficantes.El presidente Lasso invitó al FBI y a la policía colombiana a colaborar en la investigación del asesinato de Villavicencio. Es un buen primer paso, pero para que la iniciativa de verdad sea eficaz, la cooperación en este caso y en otros debe continuar durante el próximo gobierno y más allá, independientemente de quién gane este domingo.Los líderes ecuatorianos deben resistir la tentación de dejar la lucha contra la delincuencia solo en manos del ejército o de solo usar las armas para derrotar a los cárteles y las pandillas. Este enfoque ha demostrado ser ineficaz en países como México y muchas veces ha empeorado la violencia. En cambio, los dirigentes ecuatorianos deben apoyar a fiscales, jueces y policías independientes.Las fuerzas armadas de Ecuador, una de las instituciones de mayor confianza en el país, no están diseñadas para dirigir investigaciones penales, seguir el rastro del lavado de dinero ni denunciar a los funcionarios corruptos. Esas tareas corresponden a las instituciones civiles, como la policía y el poder judicial. Aunque estas instituciones no son inmunes a la corrupción y la politización entre sus filas, todavía pueden reencauzarse.La polarización ha abierto profundas brechas entre los partidarios de Correa y sus opositores, incluido Villavicencio. En la última semana, los políticos de ambos bandos se han culpado unos a otros del deterioro de la seguridad. Para avanzar, deben unirse en torno a un objetivo común: investigar los vínculos de los grupos criminales con los servidores públicos sin tratar de proteger a los miembros de su propio bando. Quienquiera que gane las elecciones presidenciales debe mirar más allá de las divisiones políticas y poner al país por encima del partido.El asesinato de Villavicencio marca un punto de inflexión. Pero aún hay tiempo para actuar antes de que el país siga avanzando por el camino que han recorrido Colombia y México. Es lo que Villavicencio habría querido.Freeman es investigador de Estudios Latinoamericanos en el Consejo de Relaciones Exteriores. More

    • 138 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Ecuador’s Crime Surge Is Devastating, but There Is a Way Forward

      by

      On Aug. 14, Pedro Briones, a congressional candidate and local political leader in Ecuador, was shot down. The assassination came less than a week after Fernando Villavicencio, a presidential candidate and vocal critic of corruption, was shot dead as he left a campaign rally in the country’s capital, Quito. The killings so close to Ecuador’s general election, scheduled for Sunday, have shocked Ecuadoreans and drawn global condemnation. The slayings show that no one — not even a presidential candidate — is safe in Ecuador.Christian Zurita, an investigative journalist and a former colleague and close friend of Mr. Villavicencio, was chosen by their political party to run in his place.What will happen next is uncertain, but it is clear that the nation’s intense political polarization will not help solve its crisis of violence.The shooting of Mr. Briones is under investigation, and six Colombian nationals are being held in connection with Mr. Villavicencio’s killing. How the country’s criminal justice system handles the ongoing inquiries will be a litmus test for the nation. Ecuadorean politicians and their international partners will need to summon the political will and resources to complete an independent and thorough investigation into the killings. If the authorities prosecute just a few hit men and leave it at that, criminal groups will only grow more brazen. But if they take the longer, tougher road — rooting out and bringing to justice the masterminds behind the killings and exposing organized crime’s ties to parts of the state — the country may have a path back from the brink.As a political scientist focused on Latin America, I have lived and worked in countries like Colombia and Guatemala, where decades ago gangs and organized criminal groups began sowing chaos as they grew more powerful. Although Ecuador historically dodged the narco-trafficking-fueled violence and internal armed conflicts that bedeviled its South American neighbors during the latter half of the 20th century, it has all the trappings of a drug traffickers’ paradise. It is sandwiched between Peru and Colombia, the world’s two largest producers of coca. And Ecuador’s economy has used dollars as the legal tender since 2000, making it attractive for money launderers.The demobilization in 2017 of Colombia’s Revolutionary Armed Forces, which had long controlled Ecuadorean trafficking routes, created a vacuum that new cartels and gangs are now battling to fill. Earlier this year, I witnessed how the violence is rewriting the rules of daily life. Ecuador’s homicide rate is now the fourth highest in Latin America and extortion has risen to a startling rate. As a result, once-lively streets are now eerily empty and businesses have begun to close at nightfall. One day, I watched as a storekeeper and his patrons crowded around a smartphone to view — and applaud — clips of vigilante justice against suspected gang members. Many people I spoke to told me they planned to migrate. Since October, more than 77,000 have reached the U.S.-Mexico border: a nearly eightfold increase from 2020.Policy blunders have left Ecuador ill-equipped to face the spiral of violence. Rafael Correa, a populist who served as the country’s president from 2007 to 2017, made the first serious missteps. It’s true that some measures put in place by his administration helped cut homicides to new lows. But Mr. Correa also eliminated the police unit for special investigations, closed a U.S. military base that supplied equipment to monitor its airspace and vast territorial waters and doubled the prison population, creating a breeding ground for gangs. His successors also made blunders.President Lenín Moreno purged many of Mr. Correa’s appointees to the executive and judiciary, and won a referendum that reinstated presidential term limits scrapped by his predecessor. The judiciary opened investigations into corruption during the Correa years. Polarization flared between Mr. Correa’s supporters, who claimed they were victims of politicized justice, while critics like Mr. Moreno argued that they were rebuilding democratic checks and balances eroded under Mr. Correa. As that political melee played out, gangs turned Ecuador’s crowded prisons into their own command centers and began to infiltrate government institutions and armed forces.Guillermo Lasso, Ecuador’s current president, has been locked in battle with Mr. Correa’s followers in the National Assembly, which Mr. Lasso dissolved by decree in May. Mr. Lasso has rolled out state emergencies and even put troops on the streets to fight the gangs and cartels. But criminal groups’ hold over the country has only grown. Alarmingly, Mr. Lasso’s brother-in-law — formerly one of his closest advisers — is under investigation for alleged ties to the Albanian mafia. In March, a businessman implicated in the case was found dead.A supporter showing a flyer of Mr. Villavicencio during a protest a day after the candidate was assassinated.Carlos Noriega/Associated PressEcuador’s crime surge is transnational, with Mexican cartels, Colombian and Venezuelan groups and the Albanian mafia all vying to control the nation’s drug trade and weaken the state. While charting a path forward may seem daunting, it’s not impossible. To curb the power of organized crime and violence, the authorities need to root out corruption, investigate ties to local and national politicians and pursue their money launderers and contacts in the state.This is a tall order for a country whose institutions are increasingly co-opted by crime. It will require ongoing cooperation and courage on the part of the country’s police, prosecutors, judges and politicians. But it has been done before. Colombia could be a model. Beginning in 2006, that nation’s government began taking steps to investigate, prosecute and sentence over 60 members of Congress who aided and abetted drug-trafficking paramilitaries.President Lasso has invited the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Colombian police to assist in the investigation of Mr. Villavicencio’s killing. But for the effort to be truly effective, the cooperation on this case and others must continue into the next administration and beyond, regardless of who wins this Sunday.Ecuador’s leaders must resist the temptation to delegate the anti-crime fight entirely to the military, or to use firepower alone to beat back the cartels and gangs. That approach has proved ineffective in countries like Mexico, and has often made the violence worse. Instead, Ecuador’s leaders must support independent prosecutors, judges and the police.Ecuador’s armed forces, one of the nation’s most trusted institutions, is not designed to lead criminal investigations, track down money launderers or expose corrupt public servants. Those are jobs for civil institutions, like the police and judiciary. While these institutions are not immune to corruption and politicization among its ranks, they are not beyond saving.Polarization has carved deep rifts between Mr. Correa’s supporters and his opponents, including Mr. Villavicencio. In the last week, politicians on both sides have resorted to blaming one another for the deteriorating security situation. To move forward, they must unite behind a shared purpose — to investigate criminal groups’ ties to public officeholders without seeking to shield members of their own camp. Whoever wins the upcoming presidential election must look beyond political divisions and put country over party.Mr. Villavicencio’s killing marks an inflection point. But there is still time to act before the country progresses farther down the path Colombia and Mexico have traveled. It is what Mr. Villavicencio would have wanted.Will Freeman is a fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. He focuses on understanding why developing democracies succeed or fail to end impunity for grand corruption.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Today’s Top News: Dry Hydrants as Lahaina Fought Wildfires, and More

      by

      The New York Times Audio app is home to journalism and storytelling, and provides news, depth and serendipity. If you haven’t already, download it here — available to Times news subscribers on iOS — and sign up for our weekly newsletter.The Headlines brings you the biggest stories of the day from the Times journalists who are covering them, all in about 10 minutes. Hosted by Annie Correal, the new morning show features three top stories from reporters across the newsroom and around the world, so you always have a sense of what’s happening, even if you only have a few minutes to spare.As the wildfires spread in Lahaina last week, firefighters struggled to secure the water they needed to deal with the spreading inferno.Philip Cheung for The New York TimesOn Today’s Episode:As Inferno Grew, Lahaina’s Water System Collapsed, with Mike BakerGeorgia Prosecutors to Present Results of Trump Election Interference Investigation, with Danny HakimIn Its Hunt for Weapons, Ukraine Rolled Back Anticorruption Rules, with Justin ScheckEli Cohen More

    • 125 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Elecciones en Guatemala: incertidumbre tras la suspensión de Movimiento Semilla

      by

      La medida pone en riesgo la candidatura presidencial de Bernardo Arévalo, un contendiente anticorrupción que sorprendió en la primera vuelta y pasó al balotaje.Las elecciones presidenciales de Guatemala se vieron envueltas en una tormenta política la noche del miércoles luego de que un fiscal suspendió la personalidad jurídica del partido de un candidato anticorrupción en ascenso, lo que pone en riesgo su intento de participar en la segunda vuelta y posiblemente asesta un golpe a una democracia ya en crispación.La medida podría evitar que Bernardo Arévalo, un congresista que remeció a la clase política en junio con un apoyo sorpresivo en las urnas que lo catapultó a la segunda vuelta del 20 de agosto, se enfrente a Sandra Torres, otrora primera dama.Rafael Curruchiche, el fiscal que integró el caso para suspender al partido, ha sido a su vez incluido en una lista de Estados Unidos de funcionarios centroamericanos corruptos por obstaculizar investigaciones de corrupción.Este suceso añade más tensión al sistema político de Guatemala, luego de que se impidiera la participación de varios de los principales candidatos a la presidencia, que eran percibidos como una amenaza para las élites políticas y económicas, además de los ataques a la libertad de prensa y el exilio forzado de decenas de fiscales y jueces dedicados a combatir la corrupción.“Nos están robando las elecciones, a plena luz del día, usando en contra las propias instituciones que nos deberían de proteger”, dijo en Twitter Gustavo Marroquín, profesor de historia y columnista.La medida del fiscal suscitó confusión e indignación en la capital de Guatemala, donde cientos de personas se reunieron a protestar el miércoles poco después del anuncio de Curruchiche. El fiscal tomó la decisión cuando las autoridades electorales de Guatemala se preparaban para desestimar oficialmente los intentos de postergar la segunda vuelta y permitir que las votaciones transcurrieran de acuerdo a lo planeado.Cuando se le preguntó por las medidas del fiscal contra el partido de Arévalo, la magistrada presidenta de la autoridad electoral, Irma Elizabeth Palencia, dijo que “es algo que nos preocupa”.El principal funcionario del Departamento de Estado de EE. UU. para el Hemisferio Occidental, Brian Nichols, dijo en Twitter que el gobierno estadounidense estaba “profundamente preocupado” por lo que describió como las “amenazas a la democracia electoral de Guatemala” por parte de Curruchiche. “Las instituciones deben respetar la voluntad de los votantes”, añadió Nichols.El partido de Arévalo puede apelar el fallo, lo cual desencadenaría una batalla legal y podría plantear el tema a la corte constitucional más alta de Guatemala.Curruchiche indicó que el caso contra el partido de Arévalo, Movimiento Semilla, involucraba denuncias de que había usado firmas fraudulentas para calificar como partido político. Luego de que su despacho investigó el caso, un juez penal ordenó la suspensión del registro de Semilla, lo que podría prohibir su participación, y la de Arévalo, en la segunda vuelta.Arévalo dijo a CNN en Español que procedería con su candidatura y asegura que según la ley guatemalteca los partidos políticos no pueden ser suspendidos durante un proceso electoral (la primera vuelta de votación se llevó a cabo el 25 de junio y se espera que la segunda vuelta sea el 20 de agosto).“Los poderosos ya no quieren que el pueblo decida libremente su futuro, pero los vamos a vencer”, dijo Arévalo en Twitter la noche del miércoles.Los juristas cuestionaron la decisión de Curruchiche, aliado del presidente saliente, Alejandro Giammattei. Un experto en derecho constitucional, Edgar Ortiz Romero, dijo que la medida estaba “violando abiertamente el orden legal”, ya que un juez de lo penal no puede suspender el registro de un partido bajo la ley electoral guatemalteca.“Creo que esto nos pone en el triste grupo de países con rasgos autoritarios más avanzados donde se usa el sistema legal para atacar a opositores”, dijo Ortiz Romero.Mirador Electoral, un grupo independiente de vigilancia electoral, dijo en un comunicado que la suspensión “intenta consumar un golpe electoral equivalente a un golpe de Estado en el país”.Emiliano Rodríguez Mega es un investigador reportero del Times en Ciudad de México. Cubre México, Centroamérica y el Caribe. Más de Emiliano Rodríguez Mega.Simon Romero es corresponsal nacional y cubre el suroeste de Estados Unidos. Ha sido jefe de las corresponsalías del Times en Brasil, los Andes y corresponsal internacional de energía. Más de Simon Romero. More

    • 113 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Guatemala’s Top Party Is Suspended, Putting Election Into Turmoil

      by

      The move threatens the presidential bid of Bernardo Arévalo, an anticorruption candidate who made a surprisingly strong showing in the initial voting, propelling him into a runoff.Guatemala’s presidential election was thrown into turmoil Wednesday night after a top prosecutor moved to suspend the party of a surging anticorruption candidate, threatening his bid to take part in a runoff and potentially dealing a severe blow to the country’s already fraying democracy.The move could prevent Bernardo Arévalo, a lawmaker who jolted Guatemala’s political class in June with a surprise showing propelling him in the Aug. 20 runoff, from competing against Sandra Torres, a former first lady.Rafael Curruchiche, the prosecutor who mounted the case to suspend the party, has himself been listed among corrupt Central American officials by the United States for obstructing corruption inquiries.The development places even greater stress on Guatemala’s political system, after the barring of several top presidential candidates who were viewed as threatening to the political and economic establishment, assaults on press freedom and the forced exile of dozens of prosecutors and judges focused on curbing corruption.“They are stealing the election in broad daylight, using one of the very institutions which is supposed to protect us,” Gustavo Marroquín, a history professor and columnist, said on Twitter.The prosecutor’s move fueled confusion and anger in Guatemala’s capital, where hundreds of people gathered in protest Wednesday shortly after Mr. Curruchiche’s announcement. The prosecutor took the action as Guatemala’s election authority was preparing to officially dismiss efforts to delay the runoff, allowing the vote to proceed as planned.When asked by reporters about the prosecutor’s move against Mr. Arévalo’s party, Irma Elizabeth Palencia, the election authority’s leader, said, “It is definitely something that worries us.”Brian Nichols, the top State Department official for the Western Hemisphere, said on Twitter that the United States government was “deeply concerned” by what he described as Mr. Curruchiche’s “threats to Guatemala’s electoral democracy.” “Institutions must respect the will of voters,” Mr. Nichols added.Mr. Arévalo’s party can appeal the ruling, setting the stage for a legal battle and potentially sending the issue to Guatemala’s top constitutional court.Mr. Curruchiche said the case against Mr. Arévalo’s party, called Semilla, or Seed, involved claims that it used fraudulent signatures to qualify as a political party. After his office looked into the case, a criminal judge ordered the suspension of Semilla’s registration, which could effectively prohibit the party, and Mr. Arévalo, from competing in the runoff.Speaking on CNN en Español, Mr. Arévalo said he would proceed with his candidacy, contending that under Guatemalan law political parties cannot be suspended during an electoral process (the first round of voting took place on June 25 and the runoff is set for Aug. 20).“The powerful no longer want the people to freely decide their future, but we will defeat them,” Mr. Arévalo also said on Twitter on Wednesday night.Legal experts questioned the move by Mr. Curruchiche, an ally of the outgoing president, Alejandro Giammattei. Edgar Ortiz Romero, a constitutional law expert, said the move was “absolutely illegal” since a criminal judge cannot suspend a party’s registration under Guatemalan election laws.“This places us in the sad group of countries with advanced authoritarian features in which the legal system is used to attack opponents,” Mr. Ortiz Romero said.The independent watchdog group Mirador Electoral said in a statement that the suspension “attempts to consummate an electoral coup equivalent to a coup d’état.” More

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      ¿Guatemala perderá la batalla por la democracia?

      by

      La democracia de Guatemala está bajo ataque. En los últimos cuatro años, un grupo de élites poderosas vinculadas con el crimen organizado, conocido como el “pacto de corruptos”, ha ido desmantelando las estructuras democráticas de Guatemala mediante la cooptación de las instituciones judiciales y el arresto y exilio de fiscales, jueces, periodistas y activistas en favor de la democracia. Ahora, como siguiente paso para consolidar su poder, están tratando de manipular las votaciones nacionales, que están en proceso.De cara a las elecciones de 2023, el presidente Alejandro Giammattei nombró en las cortes y en el Tribunal Supremo Electoral funcionarios fieles a él. Luego, el régimen gobernante y sus aliados usaron estas entidades para distorsionar la Constitución y corromper los procesos electorales con la finalidad de inclinar la balanza política a su favor. El poder judicial hizo lo propio: anuló una prohibición constitucional para permitir que la hija de un exdictador aspirara a la presidencia, permitió que se postularan como candidatos algunos aliados del régimen que han sido acusados y condenados por delitos y descalificó a sus rivales con base en cargos fabricados.Es por eso que ni siquiera los observadores más experimentados de la política guatemalteca podrían haber predicho que Bernardo Arévalo —un reformista moderado que se postuló con una plataforma anticorrupción y que tenía tan solo el 3 por ciento en las encuestas antes de la votación— sería uno de los dos candidatos con más votos en la primera vuelta de las elecciones presidenciales, celebrada el 25 de junio. Con el 12 por ciento de los votos, obtuvo un lugar en la segunda vuelta electoral del próximo mes. Su rival, Sandra Torres, del partido Unidad Nacional de la Esperanza, quien consiguió casi el 16 por ciento de los votos, fue primera dama, se ha postulado a la presidencia en tres ocasiones y está alineada con el “pacto de corruptos”. En 2019, se le acusó de financiamiento ilegal de campaña, y a su partido se le ha vinculado con el crimen organizado.El 1 de julio, la Corte de Constitucionalidad de Guatemala ordenó una nueva revisión de las actas donde se certificaron las votaciones en la primera vuelta presidencial luego de que el partido de Torres y sus aliados impugnaron los resultados, incluso cuando otros candidatos ya los aceptaron y las misiones internacionales y nacionales de observación electoral declararon que el proceso fue justo y limpio. Muchos temen que este fallo pueda sentar las bases para más impugnaciones falsas que podrían llegar a anular los resultados, demorar la segunda vuelta o excluir a Arévalo de la contienda. Las denuncias de fraude hacen recordar las que circulaban en Estados Unidos tras la victoria del presidente Joe Biden en 2020, aunque, con todo el aparato judicial de su lado, los negacionistas de las elecciones en Guatemala tienen más probabilidades de salirse con la suya.La situación está generando incertidumbre política, pero los guatemaltecos han demostrado que no están dispuestos a permitir que su democracia muera así de fácil. Los autócratas del país han desplegado toda la fuerza del Estado para robarse las elecciones, pero no son los únicos que se están movilizando. Los ciudadanos están alzando la voz para defender su derecho al voto. Si triunfan, habrán demostrado que es posible resistirse al ascenso del autoritarismo. Este podría ser un momento crítico para los guatemaltecos, uno que resuene en otras partes del mundo donde la democracia está bajo amenaza.Arévalo, exdiplomático, sociólogo y actual diputado en el Congreso de la República, surgió en un paisaje abarrotado de candidatos presidenciales. Venció a su contrincante más cercano, el candidato del partido Vamos de Giammattei, por más de 200.000 votos. Arévalo es miembro del partido de centro Movimiento Semilla, cuyos integrantes tienden a ser jóvenes y está conformado en su mayoría por estudiantes universitarios, profesores, ingenieros y propietarios de pequeñas empresas.Bernardo Arévalo de Movimiento Semilla celebrando los resultados electorales con simpatizantes en Ciudad de Guatemala el 26 de junio.Moises Castillo/Associated PressSandra Torres del partido Unidad Nacional de la Esperanza en Ciudad de Guatemala el 25 de junio.Luis Acosta/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesPese a ser relativamente desconocido, es el hijo del estimado expresidente Juan José Arévalo, quien en a mediados de la década de 1940 inició un periodo de gobierno reformista en Guatemala conocido como la primavera democrática. En 1954, un golpe de Estado respaldado por la CIA puso un fin abrupto a ese proyecto y dio paso a cuatro décadas de guerra y dictadura represiva.Dado el legado político de su padre, la oleada de popularidad de Arévalo y Semilla en este momento, si bien causa sorpresa, responde a una lógica colectiva. El partido se formó como respuesta a la serie de escándalos de corrupción que convulsionó a Guatemala en 2015. Como movimiento, encauzó el descontento popular para formar un consenso amplio entre quienes se sentían decepcionados de los políticos depredadores y los que estaban desesperados por un futuro político distinto. Tras convertirse en un partido político en 2018, Semilla se ha mantenido fiel a su misión de combatir la impunidad y fortalecer la democracia.En la primera vuelta, demostró ser una alternativa conveniente para los electores frustrados. Aunque el partido en el poder trató de eclipsar a los candidatos ajenos a la clase política dominante y preservar el statu quo, sus maniobras antidemocráticas fueron contraproducentes. Muchos esperaban que las tasas de abstención fueran más altas de lo normal, pero al final el 60 por ciento de los guatemaltecos acudió a las urnas. Casi una cuarta parte de quienes se presentaron votaron en blanco o anularon su boleta para manifestar su enojo ante lo que perciben como un sistema amañado. Ellos, junto con quienes decidieron votar por el último candidato reformista que quedaba, impulsaron a Arévalo a la segunda vuelta.El éxito de Semilla y el contraataque que suscitó incitaron un movimiento ciudadano que está trabajando para asegurarse de que la voluntad del pueblo sea escuchada. Estos ciudadanos han iniciado una campaña en redes sociales, donde publican los registros de las mesas electorales escritos a mano para rebatir las denuncias de fraude. Hay voluntarios supervisando las auditorías del conteo de votos que ordenó la corte. Las organizaciones indígenas prometieron realizar manifestaciones pacíficas en todo el país si las autoridades intentan manipular las elecciones. Hasta miembros de una comunidad empresarial históricamente conservadora declararon su apoyo al movimiento prodemocrático, con un llamado a respetar los resultados electorales y a garantizar que el proceso de la segunda vuelta electoral, programada para el 20 de agosto, transcurra según lo planeado.Ciudadanos protestaron frente al Tribunal Supremo Electoral contra la suspensión de los resultados de las elecciones, en Ciudad de Guatemala este lunes.Esteban Biba/EPA vía ShutterstockLa comunidad internacional también respalda esta iniciativa civil. La Unión Europea, la Organización de los Estados Americanos e incluso Estados Unidos, que se ha mostrado reacio a enfrentarse públicamente con el gobierno de Giammattei, afirmaron la legitimidad de los resultados y denunciaron la interferencia electoral. Otras personas que respaldan la democracia en América Central también están apoyando el movimiento ciudadano emergente en Guatemala, el cual podría servir de modelo para las iniciativas de resistencia ante sus propios dirigentes cada vez más autocráticos.Guatemala encarará obstáculos políticos profundos en las próximas semanas. Aunque los resultados electorales se declaren válidos, Arévalo tendrá que consolidar una alianza amplia antes de la segunda vuelta que pueda unificarse en torno a una apuesta política común, algo que no será nada sencillo en un país que desde hace mucho vive con divisiones étnicas, socioeconómicas e ideológicas.Pero el país ya ha superado obstáculos como estos. Las protestas contra la corrupción de 2015 convocaron a un movimiento popular diverso que derrocó a un presidente y a una vicepresidenta en funciones. Si bien los ocho años transcurridos desde entonces han traído retrocesos brutales hacia la autocracia, la paciencia y perseverancia de los líderes de oposición prepararon el camino para este nuevo impulso democrático.Aun si el calendario electoral continúa según lo planeado y se le permite contender a Arévalo, la campaña de desinformación que pretende vilipendiarlo y sembrar miedo solo se va a intensificar. Además, si logra ganar en la segunda vuelta, su bancada minoritaria en el Congreso y el arraigado poder institucional de la élite corrupta dificultarán sus intentos de gobernar con eficacia.Pero ya habrá tiempo para preocuparnos por las complicadas labores de la gobernanza. Por ahora, los riesgos políticos son más grandes que nunca. Si los negacionistas de las elecciones prevalecen, Guatemala habrá perdido la batalla por la democracia. Pero si sus defensores tienen éxito, esto supondrá un duro golpe para detener la regresión en un país donde, no hace mucho, el ímpetu autócrata parecía irreversible.Anita Isaacs es profesora de ciencias políticas en Haverford College. Rachel A. Schwartz es profesora de estudios internacionales y regionales en la Universidad de Oklahoma, además de autora del libro Undermining the State From Within: The Institutional Legacies of Civil War in Central America. Álvaro Montenegro es un periodista guatemalteco. More

    • 100 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Guatemalan Election Deniers Are Trying to Overturn Democracy

      by

      Guatemala’s democracy is under assault. Over the past four years, a group of powerful elites tied to organized crime, known as the “pact of the corrupt,” has been steadily dismantling Guatemala’s democratic guardrails by co-opting judicial institutions and arresting and exiling prosecutors, judges, journalists and pro-democracy activists. Now, in their next step to consolidate power, they are trying to manipulate the national elections that are underway.In anticipation of the 2023 elections, President Alejandro Giammattei packed the courts and the electoral tribunal with loyalists. The ruling regime and its allies then enlisted these entities to distort the Constitution and tamper with election procedures to tilt the political playing field in their favor. The judicial sector delivered — overruling a constitutional ban to permit the daughter of a former dictator to run, certifying the candidacies of regime allies charged and convicted of crimes and disqualifying rivals based on manufactured charges of malfeasance.That’s why not even the most seasoned observers of Guatemalan politics could have predicted that Bernardo Arévalo, a moderate reformist championing an anti-corruption platform and polling at just 3 percent before the vote, would be one of the two top finishers in the June 25 general elections, securing 12 percent of the vote and a spot in the runoff next month. His rival, Sandra Torres of the National Unity of Hope party, who garnered nearly 16 percent of the vote, is a former first lady and three-time presidential contender and is aligned with the “pact of the corrupt.” In 2019, she was indicted on a charge of illicit campaign financing, and her party has been linked to organized crime.On July 1, the Constitutional Court ordered electoral authorities’ ballots from the first-round presidential election to be reviewed after Ms. Torres’s party and allies challenged the results — even though other candidates have already conceded and international and domestic observer missions deemed the elections clean. Many fear the ruling could pave the way for additional spurious challenges that could eventually overturn the results, delay the second round or exclude Mr. Arévalo from competing altogether. The cries of fraud echo those in the United States after President Biden’s 2020 victory, although, with the entire judicial system on their side, Guatemala’s election deniers stand a better chance of pulling it off.The situation has fueled political uncertainty, but Guatemalans have shown that they aren’t willing to let their democracy die without a fight. Though the country’s autocrats have now deployed the full force of the state to steal the elections, they are not the only people mobilizing. Ordinary citizens are raising their voices in defense of their sacred right to vote. If they triumph, they will have shown that it is possible to resist rising authoritarianism. This could be Guatemalans’ moment — and one that reverberates in other parts of the world where democracy is under threat.Mr. Arévalo, a former diplomat, sociologist and current representative in the national legislature, emerged from the middle of the crowded presidential field. He beat the next closest challenger, Mr. Giammattei’s Vamos party candidate, by over 200,000 votes. Mr. Arévalo is a member of the centrist Movimiento Semilla, or “seed movement,” party, which skews young and is made up largely of university students, professors, engineers and small-business owners.Bernardo Arévalo of the Semilla party celebrating the election results with supporters in Guatemala City on June 26.Moises Castillo/Associated PressSandra Torres of the National Unity of Hope party in Guatemala City on June 25.Luis Acosta/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThough relatively unknown, he is also the son of the beloved former president Juan José Arévalo, who in the 1940s initiated Guatemala’s decade of reformist government known as the Democratic Spring. A 1954 C.I.A.-backed coup abruptly ended that experiment and ushered in four decades of war and repressive dictatorial rule.Given his father’s political legacy, Mr. Arévalo’s and Semilla’s surge of popularity at this moment, while surprising, is fitting. The party formed in the wake of corruption scandals that convulsed Guatemala in 2015. As a movement, it channeled popular discontent, seeking to build a broad consensus among those disillusioned with predatory politicians and desperate for a different political future. After transitioning to a political party in 2018, Semilla has remained true to its mission, aiming to combat impunity and strengthen democracy.Last month, it proved to be a welcome alternative for frustrated voters. Though the ruling party tried to sideline outsider candidates and preserve the political status quo, its anti-democratic maneuvering backfired. Many expected abstention rates to be higher than usual, but in the end 60 percent of Guatemalans turned out to vote. Nearly a quarter of those who voted cast a blank or voided ballot to register their anger at what they perceived as a rigged system. This, combined with those who chose to vote for the last reformist candidate standing, propelled Mr. Arévalo into the runoff round.Semilla’s success and the subsequent backlash have galvanized a citizen-led movement that is now working to ensure that the will of the people is heard. These citizens have started a social media campaign, posting the handwritten, precinct-level vote registries challenging claims of fraud. Volunteers are observing the court-mandated auditing of vote tallies. Indigenous organizations have vowed to stage peaceful, countrywide demonstrations if the courts attempts to manipulate the election. Even stalwart members of the historically conservative business community have endorsed the pro-democracy movement, urging respect for the electoral results and demanding that the runoff proceeds on Aug. 20 according to plan.Citizens protested in front of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal against the measure to suspend the results of the general election, in Guatemala City on Monday.Esteban Biba/EPA, via ShutterstockThe international community is rallying behind them. The European Union, the Organization of American States and even the United States, which has been reluctant to publicly clash with the Giammattei government, have affirmed the legitimacy of the results and denounced electoral interference. Fellow democrats in Central America are also rooting for Guatemala’s emergent civic movement, which could provide a blueprint for efforts to resist their own increasingly autocratic leaders.Guatemala faces profound political hurdles in the weeks ahead. Even if the court declares the results to be valid, Mr. Arévalo will have to consolidate a broad alliance before the runoff that can unite around a shared political project — no easy feat in a country long divided along ethnic, socioeconomic and ideological lines. But it has surmounted these obstacles before. The 2015 anti-corruption protests marshaled a diverse popular movement that toppled a sitting president and vice president. Though the eight years since then have brought steep autocratic regressions, the patience and persistence of opposition leaders laid the foundations for this new democratic moment.Even if the electoral timetable proceeds according to schedule and Mr. Arévalo is allowed to run, the disinformation campaign to vilify him and stoke fear will only intensify. And if he can pull off a second-round victory, his minority congressional delegation and the entrenched institutional power of the corrupt elite will hinder his efforts to govern effectively.But the messy work of democratic governance is for another day. For now, the political stakes could not be higher. If the election deniers succeed, Guatemala will have lost the battle for democracy. But if its defenders prevail, democratic backsliding will have been dealt a powerful blow in a country where not long ago, the autocratic momentum seemed irreversible.Anita Isaacs is a professor of political science at Haverford College. Rachel A. Schwartz is professor of international and area studies at the University of Oklahoma. She is the author of “Undermining the State From Within: The Institutional Legacies of Civil War in Central America.” Álvaro Montenegro is a Guatemalan journalist.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Former Ohio Speaker Householder Faces Sentencing in Bribery Scheme

      by

      Larry L. Householder, former speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives, awaits sentencing on Thursday after being convicted of participating in a racketeering conspiracy that resulted in a bailout for two struggling nuclear power plants.It is, federal prosecutors say, perhaps the biggest public corruption scandal in Ohio’s history, a three-year conspiracy in which one of Ohio’s biggest corporations funneled some $60 million to one of the state’s most powerful politicians in exchange for a $1.3 billion bailout.And those investigators say they are only coming to the end of Act I.On Thursday, the former Republican speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives, Larry L. Householder, will be sentenced in federal court in Cincinnati for violating racketeering and bribery laws.The outlines of the charges have been known since his arrest, with four other men, three years ago: FirstEnergy Corporation, a Fortune 500 electric utility based in Akron, funneled the $60 million though various nonprofit entities. In return, Mr. Householder rammed a law through the state legislature that gave the company the bailout for two troubled nuclear power plants. Prosecutors have recommended a sentence of up to 20 years.But, as described early this year in a 26-day trial, the alliance between the utility and Mr. Householder, 64, was far more than a bribery scandal. Among other things, prosecutors and experts say, it was an almost cinematic example of how the dark money that pervades both state and federal politics slithers unseen from donor to beneficiary.It is also a cautionary tale about how state legislatures — second-rung political bodies that are often run by part-time politicians, but increasingly dealing with issues of national importance — are at least as prone to manipulation by special interests as their Washington counterparts.David DeVillers, who oversaw the federal investigation as the U.S. attorney in Cincinnati until early 2021, said in an interview that the gusher of dark money was crucial to the plot and an issue well beyond Ohio.“Any time you have a supermajority, whether it’s Republicans or Democrats, and industries that are based on passing laws like marijuana or sports gambling or energy, it’s a formula for corruption,” he said.In a memorandum on sentencing last week, Mr. Householder’s lawyer, Steven L. Bradley, said that his client had not admitted wrongdoing, and that Mr. Householder genuinely believed that the legislation enacting the bailout “was an important piece of legislation, which is why he advocated and voted for it.” The blare of publicity and the ignominy of conviction, Mr. Bradley wrote, had left Mr. Householder “a broken man.” In an email, Mr. Bradley said he plans to “vigorously pursue an appeal with the hope of winning a new trial.”Mr. Householder, a onetime insurance agent from an impoverished rural county in southeast Ohio, had been House speaker from 2001 to 2004. He left his legislative seat because of term limits and faced a federal corruption investigation after leaving the post then, but was not charged.After returning to the legislature in 2016, Mr. Householder secretly spent millions in 2018 to support Republican candidates for 21 seats in the State House — more than a fifth of the 99 seats — who would back his insurgent campaign to again become House speaker. He spent more millions on a media campaign to push the nuclear bailout law to passage, and then tens of millions on a scorched-earth crusade to undermine a ballot initiative that threatened to undo it.By the time he was arrested in July 2020, Mr. Householder was soliciting secret contributions from others seeking legislative favors — and plotting to change the State Constitution’s term limits clause to extend his tenure by 16 years.At each step, a web of political action committees and dummy nonprofit organizations called 501(c)(4)s, after their place in the federal tax code, ensured that money fueling the schemes could not be traced to Mr. Householder or FirstEnergy.“The scope of the conspiracy was unprecedented,” prosecutors wrote in their sentencing memorandum. “So was the damage it left in its wake, both in terms of its potential financial harm to Ohioans and its erosion of public trust.”In a wiretap disclosed during the trial, a lobbyist charged in the affair, Neil Clark, boasted to undercover F.B.I. agents about his handiwork.“I spent close to $20 million in the last eight weeks, $20 million,” he said. “FirstEnergy got $1.3 billion in subsidies, free payments.”He later added: “So what do they care about putting in $20 million a year for this thing?”FirstEnergy sought a bailout for two nuclear power plants, including this one in North Perry, Ohio.Amy Sancetta/Associated PressFirstEnergy had sought state subsidies for two nuclear power plants on the shore of Lake Erie for years when Mr. Householder returned to the State House in 2016. The company claimed that renewable energy and cheaper fuels had made both plants unprofitable.Mr. Householder left little doubt that he wanted his old job as speaker back. After his 2016 election, FirstEnergy’s chief executive at the time, Chuck Jones, invited him to fly on the company’s private jet to attend the inauguration of President Donald J. Trump.Over several days of socializing at high-end restaurants, prosecutors said, they discussed a deal: Mr. Householder needed money to regain the speaker’s post when its occupant left office in 2018. The company needed a legislative solution to its nuclear power woes.What began with a handshake became a multimillion-dollar political operation, with the money laundered through nonprofit groups allowed by the tax code to conceal donors’ names.“They can give as much or more to the (c)(4) and nobody would ever know,” the lobbyist, Mr. Clark, told Mr. Householder in another wiretapped conversation. “So you don’t have to be afraid.”Chuck Jones in 2015, when he was FirstEnergy’s president and chief executive.Phil Masturzo/Akron Beacon Journal, via Associated PressNeil Clark, a lobbyist, was also charged in the affair.Jonathan Quilter/The Columbus Dispatch, via USA Today NetworkWeeks later, Mr. Householder established a 501(c)(4) called Generation Now. Other nonprofits, both new and old, were rolled into the scheme: a PAC called Hardworking Ohioans, two new nonprofits and many more.Rivers of anonymous money — most, but not all, from FirstEnergy — began to flow. In one typical transaction, Generation Now shunted $1 million of FirstEnergy donations to the newly formed Coalition for Growth and Opportunity, whose only reported officer was a Kentucky lawyer who oversaw other nonprofits. The Coalition for Growth and Opportunity donated $1 million to its separate PAC, which spent it on media campaigns supporting Republicans friendly to Mr. Householder and opposing unfriendly ones.And so it went: At least $3 million spent in 2018 to elect Republicans backing Mr. Householder’s speaker ambitions. Nearly $17 million more in 2019 on a successful media campaign supporting House Bill 6, the legislation bailing out FirstEnergy nuclear plants.Clean energy advocates and the natural gas industry opposed the $1.3 billion measure, which propped up two unrelated coal-fired plants and solar energy projects besides the $1 billion nuclear subsidy. And when they began collecting signatures for a ballot initiative to overturn the bailout, FirstEnergy devoted another $38 million to quash that effort.The money paid for a private detective and bullies to disrupt signature gatherers, as well as a saturation advertising campaign claiming that China was “quietly invading our energy grid” with the help of opponents of the bailout.Backers considered it money well spent. When House Bill 6 became law in July 2019, Mr. Jones, the FirstEnergy chairman, sent a picture of Mount Rushmore to Samuel C. Randazzo, then the chairman of the state Public Utilities Commission. Supplanting the mountain’s four presidents were faces of the two men and executives at FirstEnergy and another utility.Below that, prosecutors said, was an all-capital-letters caption that extolled their political clout with a common sexual vulgarity.Meanwhile, Mr. Householder’s Generation Now nonprofit was already plowing new ground. In a wiretapped conversation in 2018, Mr. Householder said he was “expecting big things in (c)(4) money from payday lenders,” an industry that has lobbied federal and state officials against regulating high-interest loans to the poor.For some, the cost of exposure has been heavy.FirstEnergy fired its top executives. Later, it paid $234 million in fines to federal agencies and surrendered another $115 million in ill-gotten gains after admitting to large-scale fraud.Mr. Clark, the lobbyist, died by suicide in 2021 after publishing a book that alleged a lifetime of dirty deals in state politics.Federal prosecutors say their inquiry is continuing, although they have not said where it might lead.F.B.I. agents removing items from the home of Samuel C. Randazzo, then the Ohio Public Utilities Commission chairman, in 2020.Adam Cairns/The Columbus Dispatch, via Associated PressIn what was, in effect, a plea bargain with federal prosecutors, FirstEnergy confessed that it had given Mr. Randazzo $4.3 million “to further FirstEnergy Corp.’s interests” on nuclear and other issues in 2019, weeks before Gov. Mike DeWine named him to head the state Public Utilities Commission.Mr. Randazzo, who denies wrongdoing, has not been charged.Court filings and related lawsuits have referred to Governor DeWine and Lt. Gov. Jon Husted, who have said they were unaware of the illegal payments. Both supported House Bill 6, and Mr. DeWine benefited from hundreds of thousand of dollars in get-out-the-vote support from FirstEnergy during his 2018 election campaign. The company also donated $75,000 to his daughter’s failed bid for a local elective office.FirstEnergy, meanwhile, faces investigation by the federal Securities and Exchange Commission and shareholder lawsuits.And in the five states where it owns electric utilities, utility commissions are likely to require tens of millions of dollars in refunds to customers, in part involving scandal-related spending.On Wednesday, the company said in a statement that it “has accepted responsibility for its actions related to House Bill 6 and has taken significant steps to put past issues behind us.”“Today we are a different, stronger company with a sound strategy and focused on a bright future,” it added.Mr. DeVillers, the former U.S. attorney, said that nonprofits like those central to the FirstEnergy scandal have been largely ignored by law enforcement. Enforcement of restrictions in the federal tax code on 501(c)(4) groups has been lax.Dave Anderson, the communications director of the Energy and Policy Institute, a watchdog group that follows the energy industry, said that might now change.“This is a case that really illustrates how they can be used for criminal malfeasance,” he said, referring to nonprofits. Now, he said, lawyers who told clients that 501(c)(4) groups are safe conduits for secret cash may be “holding their breath and thinking, ‘Maybe the convictions will be thrown out.’” More