Corruption (Institutional)

Subterms

    More stories

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Cyril Ramaphosa Unlikely to Face Impeachment in South Africa

      by

      Leaders of the governing African National Congress said they opposed holding an impeachment hearing for President Cyril Ramaphosa over a scandal involving cash stolen from a couch at his game farm.JOHANNESBURG — South Africa’s governing party, the African National Congress, is standing by its president, Cyril Ramaphosa, rejecting calls that he face an impeachment hearing over accusations that he kept a large sum of cash in a sofa at his game farm and failed to report a crime when it was stolen.The decision by the executive committee of the A.N.C. was announced on Monday after an all-day meeting — essentially killing a report that had been prepared by a three-member panel recommending that impeachment hearings go ahead.“It means the president continues with his duties as president of the A.N.C. and the republic,” Paul Mashatile, the A.N.C.’s treasurer general, said at a news conference after the meeting. “The decision that we take is in the best interest of the country.”But the president is hardly out of the woods. He still has to answer to several other investigations, including by the A.N.C.’s integrity committee, the national prosecutor’s office and the public protector, a corruption watchdog, as Mr. Mashatile pointed out. And his bid to win a second term as A.N.C. president in elections to be held in less than two weeks is hardly a sure thing.Mr. Ramaphosa has been under fire since a criminal complaint filed by a political foe in June alleged that millions of dollars in U.S. currency was stolen from a couch in a game farm, Phala Phala Wildlife, owned by the president. The complaint alleged that Mr. Ramaphosa never reported the theft and tried to cover it up to avoid the publicity — and potential legal violations — over having that much foreign currency hidden at his private residence.A damning report issued last week by two retired judges and a lawyer said that he might have violated the Constitution, and recommended that Parliament begin impeachment hearings. On Monday, Mr. Ramaphosa filed a legal challenge in the nation’s highest court challenging the report.Parliament was scheduled to convene on Tuesday to vote on whether to adopt the report and hold impeachment hearings, but that meeting was delayed until next week. A.N.C. members hold a majority of the seats in Parliament. While they are not required to do what their executive committee says, analysts say it is highly unlikely that they will break ranks in what is expected to be a public vote.What to Know About Cyril Ramaphosa and ‘Farmgate’Card 1 of 3Who is Cyril Ramaphosa? More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in Elections

      United Auto Workers Appear to Rebuke Leaders in First Vote by Members

      by

      Insurgent candidates showed strength, citing corruption scandals and calling for a tougher bargaining approach. The union president seems headed for a runoff.Shawn Fain, a challenger who has been a United Auto Workers member for 28 years.Sarah Rice for The New York TimesRay Curry, president of the United Auto Workers.Paul Sancya/Associated PressThe first United Auto Workers election open to all members appears to have produced a wave of opposition to the established leadership, signaling the prospect of sweeping changes for a union tarnished by a series of corruption scandals.As the count neared completion on Friday, the current president, Ray Curry, was in a close contest with an insurgent challenger, Shawn Fain, with each getting slightly under 40 percent. The remaining votes were scattered among three dark-horse candidates.If those results are confirmed by a court-appointed monitor overseeing the count, Mr. Fain and Mr. Curry will head for a runoff election in January.“If these results hold, it can only be seen as shocking,” said Harley Shaiken, a professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley, who has followed the U.A.W. for more than three decades. “It’s a major upset for the incumbent administration. The union is entering a new and profoundly different era.”In an interview as the results were tallied, Mr. Fain said he believed the vote reflected a desire for broad change, citing not only the corruption scandals but also an inability to win broad wage and benefits improvements over the last decade as the three Detroit automakers rang up significant profits.“I think it definitely shows the pulse of the membership and the pure fact that they’re fed up,” said Mr. Fain, an electrician who has been a member of the union for almost three decades. “I think the members want to get this union back in line and see the election as their shot.”A union spokeswoman said Mr. Curry would make a statement on the election after the results were certified.The strength of outsider candidates aligned with Mr. Fain was seen in voting for several other national and regional positions. In a two-way race for secretary-treasurer, the union’s second most powerful post, an ally of Mr. Fain had more than 60 percent of the vote.In addition to the union’s 400,000 active members, 600,000 retired members were eligible to vote in the leadership election, though not to seek office. About 106,000 ballots were cast.Since its founding in 1935, the U.A.W. had used a system in which its president and other senior officials were chosen by delegates to a convention, with results often shaped by favors and favoritism rather than the views of the rank and file.This year’s “one person, one vote” election was one of the measures that the union had agreed to as part of a settlement of a federal investigation that uncovered widespread corruption at the top of the organization. A dozen senior officials, including two former U.A.W. presidents, were convicted of embezzling more than $1 million in union funds for luxury travel and other lavish personal expenses.Last year, a court appointed a monitor to ensure that the union followed through on anticorruption reforms.Mr. Curry, 57, a former assembly-line worker from North Carolina who holds a master’s degree in business, was named president in 2021 with the task of instituting those changes after years of scandals tarnished the union’s image. He has held senior positions in the union for a decade, and many U.A.W. members see him as the candidate of the establishment.Mr. Fain, 54, and his slate are backed by a dissident group, Unite All Workers for Democracy. He has called for a wholesale turnover in the union’s leadership and a more confrontational approach to negotiating with manufacturers.The election comes at a critical time for the union. The U.A.W. is working to organize several battery plants that the three Detroit automakers have built or are building with partners — factories not automatically covered by its contracts with the manufacturers. Workers at one, a General Motors plant in Ohio that opened last summer, are scheduled to vote on U.A.W. representation on Wednesday and Thursday.G.M. is building two other battery plants in Tennessee and Michigan. Ford Motor is building two in Kentucky and one in Tennessee. Stellantis, which was formed through the merger of Fiat Chrysler and the French automaker Peugeot, intends to build a battery plant in Indiana.Next year, the U.A.W. is set to negotiate new labor agreements with the three automakers, and challengers to Mr. Curry campaigned on promises of taking a more confrontational stance. Members have demanded a resumption of cost-of-living wage adjustments, once a key element of U.A.W. contracts, which had been forgone in recent years when inflation was mild and the automakers were struggling to survive.Members also want an end to two-tier wage and benefit packages. Workers hired in 2007 or earlier have a standard wage of $32 an hour and are guaranteed pensions. Workers hired after 2007 start at lower wages and can work up to the top wage over five years. They also get a 401(k) retirement account instead of a lifelong pension.In the last decade, the automakers have rebounded strongly and now earn substantial profits. In the first three quarters of this year, G.M. generated $8 billion in net income. Ford and Stellantis earned less but still posted solid profits.Decades ago, the U.A.W. wielded immense political power, and at its peak represented more than 1.5 million workers. It lost clout as the Detroit automakers scaled back in the face of rising competition from foreign-owned competitors like Toyota and Honda. Despite attempts, it has not been able to organize workers at any of the foreign-owned auto-assembly plants that have sprung up across the South and the Midwest.Around 2014, the union became the focus of an investigation by the U.S. attorney’s office in Detroit. The inquiry revealed that top officials had embezzled membership dues and money set aside for training centers and used it for expensive cigars, wines, liquor, golf clubs, apparel and luxury travel.More than a dozen U.A.W. officials pleaded guilty. Gary Jones, a former president, served nine months of a 28-month sentence before being released from federal prison this year. Mr. Jones’s predecessor, Dennis Williams, was released after serving nine months of a 21-month sentence. More

    • 63 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      ¿México será la próxima Venezuela?

      by

      En 2018, escribí una columna en la que describía al futuro presidente de México, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, o AMLO, como una versión de izquierda de Donald Trump. Los lectores no estaban convencidos. La comparación entre los dos hombres, escribió una persona en los comentarios, “es absurda”. Otro dijo que la columna era “asombrosamente ignorante”.Permítanme retractarme. AMLO no es solo otra versión de Trump. Es peor, porque es un demagogo y un operador burocrático más eficaz.Eso volvió a quedar claro cuando los mexicanos salieron a las calles el 13 de noviembre en marchas contra los esfuerzos de AMLO para desmantelar el Instituto Nacional Electoral (INE). Durante tres décadas, el organismo independiente, pero financiado por el Estado (que antes se llamaba Instituto Federal Electoral) ha sido crucial para la transición de México de un gobierno de partido único a una democracia competitiva en la que los partidos en el poder pierden elecciones y aceptan los resultados.Entonces, ¿por qué el presidente, que ganó la elección de manera abrumadora y mantiene un alto índice de aprobación —en parte por un estilo político que se sustenta en el culto a la personalidad y por programas de transferencias de efectivo a los pobres, su principal base electoral—, iría tras la joya de la corona de los organismos civiles del país? ¿No se supone que López Obrador debe representar a las fuerzas de la democracia popular?La respuesta de AMLO es que solo busca democratizar al INE al hacer que sus integrantes sean elegidos por voto popular después de que instancias bajo su dominio nominen a los candidatos. También reduciría el financiamiento del instituto, le quitaría el poder de elaborar padrones de votantes y eliminaría las autoridades electorales estatales. De manera trumpiana, AMLO llamó a sus críticos “racistas”, “clasistas” y “muy hipócritas”.La realidad es distinta. AMLO es producto del viejo partido gobernante, el Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), que dominó casi todos los aspectos de la vida política mexicana desde finales de la década de 1920 hasta finales de la década de 1990. Ideológicamente, el partido estaba dividido en dos alas: los tecnócratas modernizadores contra los nacionalistas estatistas. Sin embargo, el partido estaba unido en su preferencia por la represión, la corrupción y, sobre todo, el control presidencial como medio para perpetuar su permanencia en el poder.AMLO puede haber pertenecido al ala estatista, pero sus ideas sobre la gobernabilidad salen directamente del manual del viejo PRI, solo que esta vez a favor de su propio partido, Morena. “Constantemente, su impulso ha sido recrear la década de 1970: una presidencia poderosa y sin contrapesos”, me escribió el lunes Luis Rubio, uno de los analistas más importantes de México. “Por lo tanto, ha intentado debilitar, eliminar o neutralizar toda una red de entidades que se crearon para ser controles del poder presidencial”. Eso incluye la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación, las agencias reguladoras del país y la comisión de derechos humanos de México. El INE y el banco central se encuentran entre las pocas entidades que se han mantenido relativamente libres de su control.¿Qué significaría que AMLO se saliera con la suya? Su mandato presidencial de seis años termina en 2024 y es poco probable que permanezca formalmente en el cargo. Pero hay una antigua tradición mexicana de gobernar tras bambalinas. Llenar el INE con personas cercanas es el primer paso para regresar a los días de votos manipulados que caracterizaron al México en el que crecí, en las décadas de 1970 y 1980.Pero también implica un deterioro más profundo, de tres maneras importantes.La primera es el papel cada vez mayor de las fuerzas armadas durante el sexenio de AMLO. “El ejército ahora está operando fuera del control civil, en abierto desafío a la Constitución mexicana, que establece que el ejército no puede estar a cargo de la seguridad pública”, escribió la analista política mexicana Denise Dresser en la edición vigente de Foreign Affairs. “A partir de órdenes presidenciales, los militares se han vuelto omnipresentes: construyen aeropuertos, administran los puertos del país, controlan las aduanas, distribuyen dinero a los pobres, implementan programas sociales y detienen a inmigrantes”.La segunda es que el gobierno mexicano a todas luces se ha rendido ante los cárteles de la droga que, según una estimación, controlan hasta un tercio del país. Eso se hizo evidente hace dos años, después de que el gobierno de Trump regresara a México a un exsecretario de Defensa, el general Salvador Cienfuegos, quien había sido arrestado en California y acusado de trabajar para los cárteles. AMLO liberó al general con rapidez. Ocho de las ciudades más peligrosas del mundo ahora están en México, según un análisis de Bloomberg Opinion, y 45.000 mexicanos huyeron de sus hogares por temor a la violencia en 2021.Y, por último, el nuevo estatismo de AMLO funciona incluso peor que el anterior. Un intento de reforma del sistema de salud de México ha provocado una escasez catastrófica de medicamentos. Ha invertido bastante en la empresa petrolera del Estado, PEMEX, que se las ha arreglado para perder dinero a pesar de los precios históricamente altos de la materia prima. El gasto en bienestar aumentó un 20 por ciento respecto al gobierno de su antecesor, pero su gobierno eliminó uno de los programas de combate a la pobreza más exitosos de México, que vinculaba la asistencia a mantener a los niños en la escuela.Los defensores de AMLO pueden argumentar que el presidente sigue siendo popular entre la mayoría de los mexicanos debido a su preocupación por los más pobres. A menudo, ese ha sido el caso de los populistas, desde Recep Tayyip Erdogan en Turquía hasta los gobiernos de Kirchner en Argentina. Pero la realidad tiene una forma de pasar factura. Lo que los mexicanos enfrentan cada vez más con AMLO es un ataque a su bienestar económico, seguridad personal y libertad política y al Estado de derecho. Si los mexicanos no tienen cuidado, este será su camino a Venezuela.Bret Stephens ha sido columnista de Opinión en el Times desde abril de 2017. Ganó un Premio Pulitzer por sus comentarios en The Wall Street Journal en 2013 y previamente fue editor jefe de The Jerusalem Post. Facebook More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa Wins a Crucial A.N.C. Battle

      by

      President Cyril Ramaphosa emerged well-placed to win a second term as the head of the country’s governing party, although there is much haggling and horse-trading to come.JOHANNESBURG — President Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa, whose presidency has been upended by claims that he tried to cover up the theft of a huge sum of cash at his farm, emerged well-placed to win a second term as leader of the governing African National Congress, and president of the country, after nominations by his party’s rank and file were released on Tuesday.The A.N.C. revealed that 3,543 branches across the country had submitted nominations for leadership positions that will be contested during a national party conference that begins on Dec. 16 in Johannesburg.At the gathering, held every five years, members choose the A.N.C.’s top officials, including their president, who typically serves as the country’s president. National elections are set for 2024, and the A.N.C. has won an outright majority of votes in every national contest since South Africa’s first democratic elections in 1994.Mr. Ramaphosa won nominations from 2,037 branches, more than double that of his closest challenger, Zweli Mkhize, who served as health minister under the president. But analysts cautioned not to make too much of the results because the contest could change drastically by the time the conference begins.Delegates, who vote by secret ballot, are under no obligation to stick with the nominations of their branches. A lot of horse-trading and haggling over votes occur between the time that nominations are released and when delegates step to the ballot box, analysts said.Dr. Mkhize said in an interview after the nominations were announced that he was still confident he would prevail next month. He said he had heard from supporters throughout the country who planned to vote for him at conference but said they did not nominate him in their branches because they feared repercussions from the party’s current leadership.“We expected this pattern,” he said. “That’s why it’s important for us to look forward to a secret ballot. Our sense at the moment is that we’ve still got very good support.”Among the names nominated for the governing party’s leadership, known as the “top six,” were several of Mr. Ramaphosa’s allies, a reflection of his political strength and the continued role of factional politics and bitter infighting, analysts said.The nominations also show a party that is falling short of its own so-called renewal agenda, said Hlengiwe Ndlovu, a senior lecturer at the University of the Witwatersrand. Only two women have been nominated for a leadership position, and they will be competing for the same spot. Younger leaders also struggled to gain traction.“How do you renew without centering women and the youth?” Dr. Ndlovu said.Jacob Zuma, the former president who has tried to re-enter the political scene after serving a 15-month sentence for failing to cooperate with a corruption inquiry, did not secure enough nominations to run for the national chairman of the A.N.C. He is still in legal jeopardy. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, who was vying to become the party’s first female president, also did not get enough nominations to automatically qualify for the ballot.Members can still enter the contest if they get nominations from 25 percent of delegates at the conference.The nominations are an early positive sign for Mr. Ramaphosa, who has been under intense scrutiny since a former intelligence chief and political rival filed a police complaint claiming that in February 2020, $4 million to $8 million in U.S. currency stashed in furniture had been stolen from Mr. Ramaphosa’s game farm, Phala Phala Wildlife.The former spy chief, Arthur Fraser, laid out scandalous accusations, including that Mr. Ramaphosa had never reported the theft to the police, instead relying on an off-the-books investigation by the head of the presidential protection unit to look into the theft.The president’s opponents within his own party have called on him to step down, accusing him of trying to cover up the theft to shield himself from accusations of money laundering and tax fraud associated with having that much foreign currency hidden at his farm.A panel appointed by Parliament is scheduled to reach a decision by the end of this month on whether Mr. Ramaphosa should face an impeachment inquiry. Since transitioning to a democracy, South Africa has never had a president face impeachment. The national prosecutor’s office and the public protector, an anticorruption watchdog, have also begun their own investigations.Mr. Ramaphosa, who has denied any wrongdoing, has argued that the investigative process must play out.During a recent meeting of A.N.C. executives, he offered a few more details about the theft. He said that about $500,000 in proceeds from the sale of game had been stolen and he named the businessman who he said was the buyer, according to South African news articles.The president’s statement did little to quell the venom he faced, local news outlets reported, saying that a leaked draft of a report by the A.N.C.’s integrity commission suggested that the scandal had brought disrepute to the party.The tense leadership battle within the A.N.C., Africa’s oldest liberation movement — and the scrutiny Mr. Ramaphosa faces over the theft — comes as the party faces a crossroads. Much of the country has become fed up with the constant drumbeat of corruption accusations against party officials. Entrenched poverty and poor delivery of services like electricity and water have caused daily hardships for many. This has all led the party’s electoral support to plummet.During last year’s local government elections, the A.N.C. failed to garner at least 50 percent of the national vote for the first time since the country’s transition from apartheid to democratic rule. Many analysts predict that the party will fall short of 50 percent during the next national elections, meaning that it will have to form a coalition with other parties to remain in power.The leadership that emerges out of next month’s A.N.C. conference “will be quite critical as a turning point of the demise of the A.N.C.,” said Mmamoloko Kubayi, a member of the party’s executive committee and a supporter of Mr. Ramaphosa. “Society will see whether the A.N.C. is serious about turning around, whether the A.N.C. is serious about showing that it has listened.”For much of his four years in power Mr. Ramaphosa had appeared to be coasting toward winning a second term. But the scandal, called Farmgate by news outlets, may threaten that.He came to power as A.N.C. leader in 2017 as an anticorruption crusader, later replacing Mr. Zuma, whose nine years in office were marred by numerous accusations that he had allowed people close to him to enrich themselves by robbing state coffers.In the wake of Mr. Zuma’s tenure, Mr. Ramaphosa championed a contentious A.N.C. rule that required party officials to be suspended from their positions if they were criminally charged in a court of law.Now, Mr. Ramaphosa could find himself facing that same rule.Lynsey Chutel More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Netanyahu’s Corruption Charges in Israel: What to Know

      by

      Benjamin Netanyahu is on track to once again lead Israel as prime minister — while facing a corruption trial.Benjamin Netanyahu will make a remarkable comeback as Israel’s prime minister after general elections, and the concession on Thursday of the current leader, Yair Lapid, put his right-wing bloc on a glide path to victory. But looming over his return is the unfinished business of the State of Israel v. Benjamin Netanyahu, a long-delayed felony corruption case.Mr. Netanyahu, who faces a litany of bribery, fraud and breach of trust charges, has denied all accusations, vociferously attacking those who seek to prosecute him. The trial put Israel into uncharted territory, dominating political life and fueling a debate about the state of Israeli democracy and the country’s legal system.Now, with his comeback as prime minister apparently assured, Mr. Netanyahu has said that he will not use his authority to upend the legal process in his corruption trial. But some of his coalition partners have signaled a different plan.Here’s where the case stands.Mr. Netanyahu in his office in 2016.Uriel Sinai for The New York TimesWhen did the corruption case start?The investigations into Mr. Netanyahu’s conduct began in 2016, when the authorities pursued claims that the prime minister had a habit of performing official favors for wealthy businessmen in exchange for gifts both material and intangible.Mr. Netanyahu, Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, was accused of grabbing up cigars and Champagne, and bracelets, bags and luxury clothes for his wife; disrupting investigative and judicial proceedings; and even demanding fawning coverage by two leading Israeli news outlets.In February 2018, the police formally recommended that he be prosecuted. In November 2019, he was indicted, and the trial began in May 2020. The Jerusalem District Court made its way through a list of more than 300 witnesses. But the trial, originally expected to last a year or more, has been delayed several times for various reasons, including once when a central witness cited “personal reasons” in 2021, another time because of coronavirus restrictions, and again in February this year, when the judge in the case tested positive for Covid.Mr. Netanyahu, center, leaving the courtroom during a hearing at his corruption trial in Jerusalem last year.Pool photo by Abir SultanWhat are the charges?The corruption trial combines three separate cases, known as Cases 1000, 2000 and 4000. (Mr. Netanyahu was cleared in a fourth case, Case 3000, which concerned the government’s procurement of German-made submarines.) Mr. Netanyahu’s wife, Sara, is also said to have received gifts but is not a defendant in the trial.One court is hearing all three cases at once, instead of one after the other, slowing down the prospect of a verdict any time soon.In Case 1000, Mr. Netanyahu is accused of accepting nearly $300,000 in gifts from 2007 to 2016 from the Hollywood producer Arnon Milchan and the Australian billionaire James Packer. In return, prosecutors say, the prime minister acted on Mr. Milchan’s behalf, including pressuring the Finance Ministry to double the duration of a tax exemption for expatriate Israelis like the producer after they return to the country from abroad. The indictment also accuses Mr. Netanyahu of lobbying the U.S. government to help Mr. Milchan renew his American visa and assisting with a merger deal involving a TV channel partly owned by Mr. Milchan.Mr. Packer is not accused of receiving anything in return for his gifts, and he and Mr. Milchan — who are not on trial — have denied wrongdoing.In Case 2000, Mr. Netanyahu allegedly discussed a quid pro quo arrangement in 2014 with Arnon Mozes, the publisher of Yediot Aharonot, one of Israel’s leading newspapers. Under the deal, the indictment says, Mr. Netanyahu was to receive supportive coverage from the paper. In exchange, he is accused of agreeing to consider enacting legislation that would curb the strength of Israel Hayom, a rival newspaper owned by Sheldon Adelson, a supporter of Mr. Netanyahu. But Mr. Netanyahu is not accused of following through on that promise. Mr. Mozes, also on trial, has denied any wrongdoing.In Case 4000, prosecutors claim that from 2012 to 2017, a telecom mogul named Shaul Elovitch and his wife granted favors to Mr. Netanyahu and his family in the hope that Mr. Netanyahu would not obstruct the Elovitches’ business interests. Mr. Elovitch is alleged to have repeatedly allowed Mr. Netanyahu and his family to shape the coverage of his news website, Walla. The Elovitches, who are on trial, deny wrongdoing.A protest against Mr. Netanyahu in 2020.Dan Balilty for The New York TimesWhy didn’t Netanyahu resign?Few sitting national leaders have stood trial on criminal charges over their official acts. Mr. Netanyahu was Israel’s first. But he was not legally obliged to step down: Israeli prime ministers can remain in office until they are convicted of a crime.Mr. Netanyahu addressed the nation live on television in 2018, shortly before the police released their findings, saying, “I feel a deep obligation to continue to lead Israel in a way that will ensure our future.”He continued: “You know I do everything with only one thing in mind — the good of the country. Not for cigars from a friend, not for media coverage, not for anything. Only for the good of the state. Nothing has made me deviate, or will make me deviate, from this sacred mission.”To some, his decision not to resign was evidence of a dangerous selfishness. Other analysts said that Mr. Netanyahu’s decision not to step aside when indicted, as his predecessors Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Olmert had done when under investigation, was a national badge of shame and exposed a grave weakness that could become more critical the longer the trial lasted.But to Mr. Netanyahu’s supporters, the trial was proof of a deep conspiracy against him.Mr. Netanyahu during his 2020 campaign.Dan Balilty for The New York TimesHow much time could he face — if any?If convicted, Mr. Netanyahu could be sentenced to several years in prison. But some of his far-right coalition partners, who were celebrating the electoral victory even before Mr. Lapid conceded, may offer crucial assistance in keeping him out of jail.They have said they will push to legalize one of the crimes he is accused of committing — or even to end the trial entirely.The man who long ago earned the nickname the Magician for his uncommon knack for political endurance has proved his ability to sidle out of harm’s way — or at least delay severe consequences.When he arrived at the courthouse in East Jerusalem on a Sunday in 2021, Mr. Netanyahu pleaded not guilty, but not before delivering a fiery speech denouncing the case against him.He called the trial “an attempt to thwart the will of the people, an attempt to bring me and the right down.” He accused the police, the prosecution and “left-wing newspapers” of colluding against him but said he would not be cowed.“They don’t mind if some sort of obedient right-wing poodle comes instead, but I am not a poodle,” he declared.David M. Halbfinger More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Threat to Democracy? Start With Corruption, Many Voters Say

      by

      In a Times/Siena survey, respondents’ concerns about democracy often diverged from typical expert analysis.A rally called Save America last week in Mesa, Ariz. People have very different ideas of what that term means. Rebecca Noble for The New York TimesWhen we started our national poll on democracy last week, David Leonhardt’s recent New York Times front-page story on threats to democracy was at the top of my mind. His article focused on two major issues: the election denial movement in the Republican Party, and undemocratic elements of American elected government like the Electoral College, gerrymandering and the Senate.But when we got the results of our Times/Siena poll late last week, it quickly became clear these were not the threats on the minds of voters.While 71 percent of registered voters agreed that democracy was “under threat,” only about 17 percent of voters described the threat in a way that squares with discussion in mainstream media and among experts — with a focus on Republicans, Donald J. Trump, political violence, election denial, authoritarianism, and so on.Instead, most people described the threat to democracy in terms that would be very unfamiliar to someone concerned about election subversion or the Jan. 6 insurrection — and I’m not just talking about stop-the-steal adherents who think the last election already brought American democracy to an end.The poll results help make sense of how so many voters can say democracy is under threat, and yet rank “threats to democracy” low on the list of challenges facing the country.When respondents were asked to volunteer one or two words to summarize the current threat to democracy, government corruption was brought up most often — more than Mr. Trump and Republicans combined.For some of these voters, the threat to democracy doesn’t seem to be about the risk of a total collapse of democratic institutions or a failed transition of power. Or they may not view the threat as an emergency or a crisis yet, like being on the brink of sustained political violence or authoritarianism.Instead, they point most frequently to a longstanding concern about the basic functioning of a democratic system: whether government works on behalf of the people.Many respondents volunteered exactly that kind of language. One said, “I don’t think they are honestly thinking about the people.” Another said politicians “forget about normal people.” Corruption, greed, power and money were familiar themes.Overall, 68 percent of registered voters said the government “mainly works to benefit powerful elites” rather than “ordinary people.”Another 8 percent of voters cited polarization as the major threat to democracy. Like corruption, polarization poses a threat to democracy but might not necessarily count as an imminent crisis.And perhaps most surprising, many voters offered an answer that wasn’t easily categorized as a threat to democracy at all. Inflation, for instance, was cited by 3 percent of respondents — about the same as the share citing political extremists and violence. For perhaps as many as one-fifth of voters, the “threat to democracy” was little more than a repackaging of persistent issues like “open borders” and “race relations” or “capitalism” and “godlessness.”The 17 percent of voters who cited something related to Mr. Trump and election denial seemed to elevate the issue of democracy the most: Overall, 19 percent of those respondents volunteered that the state of democracy was the most important problem facing the country — more than any other issue.Among everyone else: Just 4 percent stated that concern as the No. 1 issue.My colleagues have more on this story here. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Lula salió de prisión, y ahora podría volver a ser el presidente de Brasil

      by

      RÍO DE JANEIRO — En 2019, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva pasaba 23 horas al día en una celda aislada, con una caminadora, de una penitenciaría federal.El expresidente de Brasil fue sentenciado a más de 20 años de prisión por cargos de corrupción; las condenas parecían poner fin a la carrera histórica del hombre que alguna vez fue el león de la izquierda latinoamericana.Ahora, liberado de la prisión, Da Silva está a punto de volver a ganar la presidencia de Brasil, una increíble resurrección política que parecía impensable.El domingo, los brasileños votarán por su próximo líder, y la mayoría elegirá entre el presidente Jair Bolsonaro, de 67 años, el actual mandatario de derecha, y Da Silva, un entusiasta izquierdista de 76 años mejor conocido como “Lula”, cuyas condenas por corrupción fueron anuladas el año pasado luego de que el Supremo Tribunal Federal de Brasil dictaminó que el juez que procesó sus casos no fue imparcial.Durante más de un año, las encuestas han ubicado a Da Silva con una ventaja dominante. Ahora, un aumento en sus números sugiere que podría ganar el domingo con más del 50 por ciento de los votos, lo que evitaría una segunda vuelta con Bolsonaro.Una victoria completaría la extraordinaria travesía de Da Silva, a quien el expresidente Barack Obama una vez calificó como “el político más popular de la Tierra”. Cuando dejó el cargo en 2011 después de dos mandatos, el índice de aprobación de Da Silva superaba el 80 por ciento. Pero luego se convirtió en la pieza central de una extensa investigación sobre sobornos gubernamentales que condujo a casi 300 arrestos, lo llevó a prisión y, aparentemente, acabó con su carrera política.Da Silva se ha comparado con Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi y Martin Luther King Jr., presos políticos que ampliaron sus movimientos tras ser liberados.Dado Galdieri para The New York TimesHoy, el exlíder sindical vuelve a ser el centro de atención, esta vez listo para retomar el poder de la nación más grande de América Latina, con 217 millones de habitantes, y con el mandato de deshacer el legado de Bolsonaro.“¿Cómo intentaron destruir a Lula? Pasé 580 días en la cárcel porque no querían que me postulara”, le dijo Da Silva a una multitud de simpatizantes la semana pasada, con su famosa voz grave que se escucha más ronca debido a la edad y a una campaña agotadora. “Y allí me quedé tranquilo, preparándome como se preparó Mandela durante 27 años”.En la campaña electoral, Da Silva ha comenzado a compararse con Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi y Martin Luther King Jr., presos políticos que ampliaron sus movimientos después de ser liberados. “Estoy convencido de que sucederá lo mismo en Brasil”, dijo en otro mitin celebrado este mes.El regreso de Da Silva a la presidencia consolidaría su estatus como la figura más influyente en la democracia moderna de Brasil. Se trata de un ex trabajador metalúrgico, con una educación que llegó al quinto grado e hijo de trabajadores agrícolas analfabetos, que durante décadas ha sido una fuerza política, y lideró un cambio transformador en la política brasileña que se aleja de los principios conservadores y se acerca a los ideales de izquierda y los intereses de la clase trabajadora.El Partido de los Trabajadores, un movimiento de izquierda que fundó en 1980, ganó cuatro de las ocho elecciones presidenciales realizadas desde el final de la dictadura militar en 1988, y terminó en segundo lugar en el resto de los comicios.Como presidente de 2003 a 2010, la gestión de Da Silva ayudó a sacar a 20 millones de brasileños de la pobreza, revitalizó la industria petrolera del país y elevó a Brasil en el escenario mundial, llegando a organizar la Copa del Mundo y los Juegos Olímpicos de Verano.Pero también permitió que un gran sistema de sobornos se originara en todo el gobierno, por lo que muchos de sus aliados del Partido de los Trabajadores fueron condenados por aceptar sobornos. Si bien los tribunales desestimaron las dos condenas de Da Silva por aceptar un condominio y renovaciones de empresas constructoras que licitaron contratos gubernamentales, no afirmaron su inocencia.Desde hace mucho tiempo, Da Silva ha afirmado que los cargos son falsos.En general, la campaña de Da Silva se ha construido en torno a la promesa que ha formulado desde hace décadas: mejorar la vida de los pobres de Brasil.Dado Galdieri para The New York TimesSi Da Silva gana la presidencia, en parte será gracias a una campaña de la vieja escuela. Recorrió su vasto país realizando mítines presenciales. Y decidió irse por lo seguro: no asistió a un debate el sábado pasado, ha ofrecido pocos detalles sobre sus propuestas, y rechazó la mayoría de las solicitudes de entrevistas, también con The New York Times.Además ha construido una amplia coalición, desde comunistas hasta empresarios, y escogió como su compañero de fórmula a Geraldo Alckmin, un exgobernador de centroderecha que fue su oponente en las elecciones presidenciales de 2006.A Da Silva también le ha beneficiado que se enfrenta a un presidente profundamente impopular. Las encuestas muestran que aproximadamente la mitad de los brasileños dicen que nunca apoyarían a Bolsonaro, quien ha molestado a muchos votantes con un torrente de declaraciones falsas, políticas ambientales destructivas, la adopción de medicamentos no probados en vez de las vacunas contra la COVID-19 y los duros ataques que ha realizado contra rivales políticos, periodistas, jueces y profesionales de la salud.En la campaña electoral, Bolsonaro ha dicho que Da Silva es un ladrón y un comunista, mientras que Da Silva describe al presidente como una persona autoritaria e inhumana.Si es elegido, Da Silva sería el ejemplo más significativo del reciente giro a la izquierda de América Latina. Desde 2018, los movimientos de izquierda han protagonizado una oleada de elecciones contra los políticos en funciones en México, Colombia, Argentina, Chile y Perú.El presidente Jair Bolsonaro de Brasil durante un mitin en Campinas, São Paulo, este mes.Victor Moriyama para The New York TimesEn general, la campaña de Da Silva giró en torno a la promesa que ha formulado durante décadas: mejorar la vida de los pobres de Brasil. La pandemia azotó la economía del país, con una inflación que alcanzó los dos dígitos y el número de personas que padecen hambre se duplicó a 33 millones. También se comprometió a ampliar la red de seguridad, aumentar el salario mínimo, reducir la inflación, alimentar y darle vivienda a más personas y crear empleos a través de grandes proyectos de infraestructura.“Fue el presidente antipobreza y ese es el legado que quiere conservar si gana”, dijo Celso Rocha de Barros, un sociólogo que escribió un libro sobre el Partido de los Trabajadores.Sin embargo, como sucede con la mayoría de los políticos exitosos, los discursos de Da Silva suelen ser cortos en detalles y extensos en promesas. Con frecuencia forja su retórica en torno a un enfrentamiento entre “ellos”, las élites, y “nosotros”, el pueblo. Porta sus credenciales de la clase trabajadora en la mano izquierda porque a los 19 años perdió su dedo meñique en una fábrica de autopartes. Y transmite su mensaje de hombre común, con muchas referencias a la cerveza, la cachaza y la picaña, el corte de carne más famoso de Brasil.“Piensan que los pobres no tienen derechos”, dijo la semana pasada frente a una multitud de simpatizantes en uno de los barrios más pobres de São Paulo. Y aseguró que él lucharía por sus derechos. “Vamos a volver a tener el derecho de hacer un asadito en familia el fin de semana, de comprar una picanhazinha, de comer ese pedacito de picanha con su grasa pasado por harina, y un vaso de cerveza fría”, gritó entre vítores.“Es el candidato del pueblo, de los pobres”, dijo Vivian Casentino, de 44 años, una cocinera vestida con el color rojo del Partido de los Trabajadores, en un mitin celebrado esta semana en Río de Janeiro. “Él es como nosotros. Es un luchador”.En su primer período como presidente, Da Silva utilizó el auge de las materias primas para financiar la expansión de su gobierno. Esta vez, la economía de Brasil está en un estado más precario y él propone impuestos más altos para los ricos con el fin de financiar más beneficios para los pobres. Algunos votantes están incómodos con sus planes después de que las políticas económicas de su sucesora, elegida por él, hicieron que Brasil entrara en una recesión.Aunque su estilo político no ha cambiado en su sexta campaña presidencial, ha tratado de modernizar su imagen. Ha incluido más referencias a las mujeres, los negros, los pueblos indígenas y el medioambiente en sus discursos y propuestas, e incluso prometió abogar por las “ensaladas orgánicas”.Maria da Silva, de 58 años, llora mientras muestra el refrigerador vacío en la casa abandonada en la que vive con su familia de ocho integrantes en Ibimirim, Brasil, el mes pasado. No tiene relación con el expresidente.Carl De Souza/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesEn una reunión reciente con personas influyentes de las redes sociales, incluido el youtuber más popular del país, un comediante ingenioso y un rapero con tatuajes en la cara, Da Silva los instó a contrarrestar las sugerencias de que era corrupto.“Globo pasó cinco años llamándome ladrón”, dijo, refiriéndose a la cadena de televisión más grande de Brasil. Dijo que deseaba que el presentador principal del canal abriera el noticiero alguna noche pidiéndole perdón. “Las disculpas son difíciles”, agregó.Da Silva nunca ha reconocido completamente el papel del Partido de los Trabajadores en el esquema de corrupción del gobierno que persistió durante gran parte de los 13 años que estuvo en el poder. La investigación, llamada Operación Lava Jato, reveló cómo las empresas pagaron cientos de millones de dólares en sobornos a funcionarios gubernamentales a cambio de contratos públicos.Da Silva dice que sus enemigos políticos lo incriminaron para eliminar al Partido de los Trabajadores de la política brasileña. También acusó al gobierno de Estados Unidos de ayudar a impulsar la investigación.La investigación finalmente se vio envuelta en su propio escándalo porque se demostró que fue utilizada como una herramienta política. Los fiscales se centraron en los delitos del Partido de los Trabajadores por encima de otros partidos, y los investigadores filtraron las conversaciones grabadas de Da Silva. Más tarde se reveló que Sergio Moro, el juez federal encargado del caso, estaba en connivencia con los fiscales, al mismo tiempo que actuaba como el único árbitro en muchos de los juicios.Da Silva tras salir de prisión en 2019.Rodolfo Buhrer/ReutersEn 2019, Da Silva fue excarcelado después de que el Supremo Tribunal Federal dictaminó que podía estar libre mientras presentaba las apelaciones. Luego, el año pasado, el tribunal desestimó sus condenas y determinó que fueron juzgadas en el tribunal equivocado y que Moro no fue imparcial.Da Silva es impulsado por un culto a la personalidad, construido durante más de cuatro décadas a la vista del público, y es mucho más popular que el partido político que construyó.Creomar de Souza, un analista político brasileño, dijo que las democracias inmaduras a menudo pueden girar en torno a una sola personalidad en vez de un movimiento o conjunto de ideas. “Algunas democracias jóvenes luchan por dar un paso adelante”, dijo. “Un individuo se convierte en una parte crucial del juego”.En un mitin de Da Silva convocado en Río esta semana, Vinicius Rodrigues, un estudiante de historia de 28 años, estaba repartiendo volantes para el partido comunista. “Apoyamos a Lula específicamente”, dijo, pero no al Partido de los Trabajadores.Cerca de allí, Luiz Cláudio Costa, de 55 años, vendía cintas para la cabeza que decían “Estoy con Lula” a 50 centavos de dólar. Siempre había votado por Da Silva, pero en 2018 eligió a Bolsonaro. “Me equivoqué”, dijo. “Necesitamos que Lula regrese”.Da Silva es impulsado por un culto a la personalidad, construido durante más de cuatro décadas a la vista del público.Dado Galdieri para The New York Times More