Politics and Government

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Kenya Starts to Digest the Result of a Contested Election

      by

      Vice President William Ruto was declared the winner, beating Raila Odinga, but Mr. Odinga has rejected the results A sharply divided electorate and uncertainty over how the apparent loser will react have roiled a nation pivotal to East Africa’s stability.KISUMU, Kenya — After a tumultuous political day in Kenya, the country on Tuesday began to come to terms with the reality of a new president-elect, William Ruto, a sharply divided electorate and uncertainty over how the election’s apparent loser would react to defeat in a nation pivotal for the economy and stability of East Africa.Mr. Ruto, who is currently the vice president, moved quickly on Monday in a speech and news conference to cement his new status after being declared the winner of last Tuesday’s election with 50.49 percent of the vote. He called for unity and said that there was “no room for vengeance” after a hard-fought campaign. He was greeted on Tuesday with a string of flattering newspaper headlines in Kenya.In a choreographed sequence of announcements, he also offered an olive branch to supporters of his main opponent, Raila Odinga, a former prime minister and opposition leader who had been thwarted four previous times in his attempts to win the presidency.But two major factors served to keep the electorate on edge. The first was a worrying split in the electoral commission, four of whose seven members said on Monday that they could not accept the outcome given the opaque nature of the vote counting. Their statement was made even before Mr. Ruto was pronounced the winner and is likely to feature in any court challenge to the election result.The second is Mr. Odinga’s silence. He is scheduled to hold a news conference later on Tuesday, but one of his leading aides described the election headquarters on Monday as a “crime scene.”Previous elections in Kenya, a country whose democracy is closely watched across Africa and farther afield, have led to orchestrated violence.After a 2007 election, at least 1,200 people were killed and about 600,000 others were forced to flee their homes. This time, religious and civic leaders, as well as much of the political class and the security forces, have emphasized the importance of accepting results and resolving disputes through the courts.“We are waiting for Baba to speak,” said Wycliffe Oburu, a 23-year-old supporter of Mr. Odinga, using the name by which the veteran opposition leader is often called. “We cannot lose this election.”Riot police officers patrolling Nairobi on Tuesday following the announcement of the results of Kenya’s presidential election.Thomas Mukoya/ReutersOn Tuesday morning the electoral commission formally declared Mr. Ruto president-elect in a special edition of the government’s Kenya Gazette, in a move apparently intended to underscore the legality of the results announced a day earlier.Many supporters of Mr. Odinga view Mr. Ruto and his appeal to Kenya, a country Mr. Ruto calls a “hustler nation,” with extreme suspicion. And for voters in western Kenya, an ethnic stronghold for Mr. Odinga where many people say that they have been excluded from presidential power since independence, the announcement on Monday of Mr. Ruto’s win stung.In towns along the eastern edge of Kisumu County in western Kenya, the soot of burned tires, as well as stones and sticks, were strewn across the streets on Tuesday, evidence of protests the night before. Large rocks and boulders could also be seen along a major highway that runs from Kisumu, a city on the shore of Lake Victoria, to Busia, which is near the border with Uganda.Protesters on that highway clashed with the police overnight, according to witnesses and young men crowded at bus stops and shops on Tuesday in anticipation of Mr. Odinga’s speech. There were no other reports of clashes, though an election officer in Embakasi, an area east of the capital, Nairobi, was found dead after going missing, newspapers reported on Tuesday. It was not immediately clear whether his death was linked to the voting.Key to any challenge to the result will be any evidence that the voting or the count was significantly flawed. Mr. Odinga challenged the result of the 2017 election, which he lost to Uhuru Kenyatta, in the Supreme Court, which ruled that the election should be annulled and held anew. Three months later, Mr. Kenyatta won again, though Mr. Odinga had asked his supporters to boycott the vote. In a move that spoke to the shifting alliances that are a hallmark of Kenya’s politics, Mr. Kenyatta supported Mr. Odinga this time around.A statement on Tuesday by the respected Election Observation Group, which comprises civic and faith-based groups, could serve to make Mr. Odinga’s task more difficult. The group did its own analysis of the published results and concluded that they were broadly accurate.The detailed statement concluded that the results the group had seen were “consistent” with those given by the electoral commission.Abdi Latif Dahir More

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Kenya Elects New President, but Disputes Erupt

      by

      Kenya is often held up as a beacon of democracy in Africa, but as the latest election showed, it is not always pretty. Disputes started even before a winner was named.NAIROBI, Kenya — On a continent where military coups and rubber stamp elections have proliferated in recent years, Kenya stands out.Despite its flaws and endemic corruption, the East African nation and economic powerhouse has steadily grown into a symbol of what is possible, its democracy underpinned by a strong Constitution and its hard-fought elections an example to other African nations seeking to carve a path away from autocracy. But Kenya has just hit a speed bump.On Monday, a winner was declared in its latest presidential election, ending an unpredictable battle that had millions of Kenyans glued to their televisions and smartphones as the results rolled in. William Ruto, the president-elect, beamed as he addressed a hall filled with roaring supporters, lauding the “very historic, democratic occasion.”Vice President William Ruto of Kenya was named the winner of the country’s presidential election. Before the announcement, four out of the country’s seven election commissioners refused to verify the results.Tony Karumba/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesBut the losing candidate, Raila Odinga, rejected the result even before it was announced. A fracas erupted in the hall where Mr. Ruto had been speaking, and where the votes had been counted, sending chairs and fists flying. And four electoral commissioners stormed out, casting doubt on a result that is almost certain to end up in court.And so the election hangs in the balance, scrutinized not just at home but across a continent where Kenya’s rambunctious democracy is among those that are viewed as indicators of progress.“We do not have the luxury to look back, we do not have the luxury to point fingers,” Mr. Ruto said. “We must close ranks to work together.”It started out as a day of hope.Early in the morning, several thousand people began packing into the giant hall in a Nairobi suburb to hear the election results, following an arduous six-day count that had the country on tenterhooks.Mr. Ruto before the announcement of the results of Kenya’s presidential election on Monday.Monicah Mwangi/ReutersMr. Ruto and Mr. Odinga had been neck-and-neck throughout the count, sometimes separated by as few as 7,000 votes, according to unofficial news media tallies. Those razor-thin margins left many nervous: Although its democracy is robust, Kenya’s elections can be vicious, and its last three contests were marred by disputed results that led to protracted crises, court cases and street violence that in 2007 killed over 1,200 people.Chastened by those failures, the electoral commission had gone to extraordinary lengths to ensure a clean vote. Within 24 hours of polls closing last Tuesday evening, it had posted to its website images showing the results from nearly every polling station — over 46,000 of them.But as Wafula Chebukati, the chief electoral commissioner, prepared to announce the winner on Monday, one of Mr. Odinga’s top aides called an impromptu news conference outside.“This was the most mismanaged election in Kenya’s history,” Saitabao Ole Kanchory told reporters in a flurry of invective that described the counting center as “a crime scene” and called on those in charge “to be arrested.”Moments later, pandemonium erupted inside the hall.Supporters of Mr. Odinga, including Mr. Ole Kanchory, stormed the dais, throwing chairs on the floor and clashing with security officials brandishing truncheons. Foreign diplomats and election observers fled to a backstage area — but a choir that had been belting out gospel songs for much of the day continued to sing.A Kenyan police officer firing tear gas at protesters who set tires on fire in Kisumu on Monday.Yasuyoshi Chiba/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesOnce the situation calmed, Mr. Chebukati emerged to deliver a short speech in which he noted that two of his commissioners had been injured in the melee — and others harassed, “arbitrarily arrested” or disappeared — before proceeding to announce the results.Mr. Ruto received 50.49 percent of votes, he said, against 48.85 percent for Mr. Odinga, a difference of just 233,211 votes but enough to avoid a runoff.In a speech that appeared intended to project authority and offer reassurance, Mr. Ruto thanked his supporters and vowed to work for the good of Kenya. He promised to set aside the bitterness of the campaign — and the chaotic scenes minutes earlier — to concentrate on the country’s flailing economy.“There is no room for vengeance,” Mr. Ruto said, flanked by his wife and by his running mate, Rigathi Gachagua. “Our country is at a stage where we need all hands on deck to move it forward. We do not have the luxury to look back.”Celebrations erupted in the streets of Eldoret, a stronghold for Mr. Ruto in the Rift Valley, where there was a deafening cacophony of horns, whistles and chants filling the downtown area.But in much of the country, his victory was overshadowed by a major development: Four of the seven electoral commissioners refused to verify the vote, defying Mr. Chebukati and decamping to a luxury hotel where they denounced “the opaque nature” of the final phase of the count.Those commissioners, it turned out, had been appointed by Mr. Odinga’s most prominent ally in the race, President Uhuru Kenyatta, who is barred by term limits from running again.Speaking to journalists a few hours later, Mr. Ruto dismissed their declaration as a “side show.” Under Kenyan law, he said, Mr. Chebukati alone is responsible for declaring the winner.“Legally, constitutionally, the four commissioners pose no threat at all to the legality of the declaration,” Mr. Ruto said.Supporters of Raila Odinga protesting in Kibera after Mr. Ruto was declared president-elect.Marco Longari/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesStill, the drama suggested that a day that should have signaled the end of the presidential contest might end up being just another chapter in the nail-biter race that has had Kenyans on the edge of their seats since the vote on Tuesday.The candidates were a study in contrasts.Mr. Odinga, 77, a leftist from one of Kenya’s most storied political dynasties, made his first bid for the presidency in 1997. He ran three more times, always losing, before trying again this year.Although he did once serve as prime minister, Mr. Odinga’s electoral defeats embodied the broader frustrations of his ethnic group, the Luo, which has never controlled the Kenyan presidency in all the years since the nation gained independence from Britain in 1963.Mr. Ruto, 55, the country’s vice president and a wealthy businessman, cast himself as champion of Kenya’s “hustler nation” — the disillusioned, mostly young strivers struggling to gain a foothold. He frequently told voters about his humble origins, including a barefoot childhood and an early career selling chickens on the side of a busy highway.That image contrasted with Mr. Ruto’s considerable wealth, which has grown during his political career to include a luxury hotel, thousands of acres of land and a large poultry processing plant.While the “hustler” pitch resonated powerfully with some Kenyans, others just shrugged. Just 40 percent of Kenyans under 35 registered to vote in this election, and the 65 percent turnout was sharply down from the 80 percent reported in the 2017 election.Mr. Ruto, center left, and his running mate, Rigathi Gachagua, center right, after the election results were announced.Tony Karumba/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe low turnout appeared to be a rejection of what many saw as a bad choice between candidates from their country’s discredited political elite.In voting for Mr. Ruto, millions of Kenyans overlooked the charges he once faced at the International Criminal Court, which a decade ago accused him of whipping up the storm of violence after the 2007 election that nearly pushed Kenya into a civil war.The charges included murder, persecution and forcing people to leave their homes, but the case collapsed in 2016. The Kenyan government — Mr. Ruto was vice president — engaged in what the court said was “witness interference and political meddling.”Mr. Ruto was running not just against Mr. Odinga but, in effect, against his own boss, Mr. Kenyatta, whom he accused of betrayal for backing Mr. Odinga.Instead of delivering votes for his chosen successor, Mr. Kenyatta suffered a humiliating rebuke from voters in his heartland, the Mount Kenya region, where ethnic Kikuyus rejected his allies across the board. Even at the polling station where Mr. Kenyatta cast his vote on Tuesday, Mr. Ruto scored a sweeping majority, the results showed.Debilitating economic troubles provided a bleak backdrop to Tuesday’s vote. The tourism-reliant economy has been battered in recent years, first by the coronavirus pandemic, then by Russia’s assault on Ukraine, which caused food and fuel prices to rise even more amid a global downturn.“Maize flour, cooking oil, cooking gas — everything is going up,” Abzed Osman, an actor who also works in tourism, said as he stood in line to vote on Tuesday in the Nairobi district of Kibera, Africa’s largest shantytown.By Monday evening in Kisumu County, one of Mr. Odinga’s strongholds in western Kenya, hundreds of protesters who had been eagerly awaiting the results began demonstrating and burning tires, witnesses said.Hours later a spokesman for Mr. Odinga, Dennis Onsarigo, said the candidate planned to address the nation on Tuesday.The police fired tear gas as people protested the election results in Kisumu.Ed Ram/Getty ImagesDeclan Walsh More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Rishi Sunak Has a Sterling Résumé. It’s Not Helping Him Replace Boris Johnson.

      by

      Mr. Sunak is viewed by many in his party as too distant from ordinary Britons, and is being blamed by some for setting off the rebellion that toppled Prime Minister Boris Johnson.CARDIFF, Wales — Just a few weeks ago Rishi Sunak, the former chancellor of the Exchequer, seemed well-placed to become Britain’s next prime minister, topping the short list of two contenders selected by Conservative Party lawmakers to replace the departing Boris Johnson.With an impeccable résumé, a reputation for competence and a reservoir of good will from having guided Britain’s economy through the pandemic, Mr. Sunak was regarded as perhaps the country’s brainiest, most polished and most successful frontline politician.But some of those same qualities now seem to be working against him. That resistance has hindered his pursuit of 10 Downing Street, according to opinion polls that show him trailing the foreign secretary, Liz Truss, in the race to succeed Mr. Johnson, with the winner to be announced on Sept. 5.Mr. Sunak’s diminished fortunes have added urgency to his campaign as he faces off with Ms. Truss in a series of debates across Britain. At an event in Cardiff, he bounded onto the stage with a broad smile and pleaded for votes from hundreds of activists in his party who will be among those who decide the outcome of the contest.“I will give you my everything, my heart and my soul — everything I’ve got,” he said, turning to face different parts of the hall and promising to make his audience “feel enormously proud of the Conservative government that I will be privileged to lead.”Mr. Sunak’s diminished fortunes have added urgency to his campaign as he faces off with Foreign Secretary Liz Truss in a series of debates across Britain.Henry Nicholls/Agence France-Presse, via Pool/AFP, via Getty ImagesMr. Sunak, 42, received warm applause, and outside the hall, Paul Fisher, an accountant from Blackwood, said he was likely to vote for the former chancellor because “economically, he seems like the safer pair of hands.” But even he added that Mr. Sunak “does come across as a bit too polished.”Mr. Johnson’s departure from Downing Street after a series of scandals has left the ultimate decision on his successor in the hands of around 160,000 Conservative Party members, a small “selectorate” that, by definition, is more right-wing than the general population but also whiter, older and more male.Many remain loyal to Mr. Johnson, and that has also created a problem for Mr. Sunak: He has been accused of treachery by some Conservative Party members because his cabinet resignation last month helped set off the rebellion against the prime minister.A politician unaccustomed to failure, Mr. Sunak, was until recently the undisputed rising star of British politics after a meteoric ascent that took him from newbie lawmaker to chancellor of the Exchequer in less than five years.Mr. Sunak, center, is being hurt by the sense that he helped set off the rebellion against Boris Johnson, which some Conservatives view as a betrayal. Toby Melville/Press Association, via Associated PressHe is also a walking success story of multiracial Britain, having been born in Southampton, on the south coast, to parents of Indian heritage who settled in the country six decades ago. If he wins the election, Mr. Sunak would become Britain’s first prime minister of color.Mr. Sunak’s father was a family doctor, his mother ran a pharmacy, and they saved money to send him to Winchester College, one of Britain’s most elite and academically rigorous fee-paying schools.He graduated with a top degree from Oxford University and then attended Stanford University, where he met his future wife, Akshata Murty, the daughter of an Indian technology billionaire.Mr. Sunak made his own fortune in finance, including a spell at Goldman Sachs, and entered Parliament in 2015, becoming chancellor of the Exchequer in 2020 at age 39. His popularity surged during the pandemic when the Treasury dispensed billions to save jobs and support struggling Britons.But setbacks followed with revelations early this year that Ms. Murty had limited her tax exposure in Britain; after the furor, and days of negative headlines, she volunteered to pay the extra tax. Mr. Sunak was also criticized when it emerged that he had retained a U.S. green card, which would allow him to live permanently in the United States. He gave it up before making his first visit to the country as chancellor last October.And while his top-notch résumé might be a dream for recruiters, it seems less popular with Conservative Party members drawn from provincial Britain.With homes in London, in his parliamentary constituency in Yorkshire and in Santa Monica, Calif., Mr. Sunak looks like a prosperous international jet-setter, because that’s what he is.“He is, in the end, perhaps just too shiny for the party membership,” said Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London. He added that with inflation soaring, interest rates rising and recession looming, Conservatives may think it is hard for someone of such affluence to appreciate the problems confronting ordinary Britons.Mr. Sunak’s enemies leaped on reports that he had worn a suit that cost 3,500 pounds and that he had worn a pair of £490 Prada loafers on a visit to a construction site.Lee Smith/Reuters“They do live in the real world,” Professor Bale said of party members, “and I think, in some ways, there was always a degree of suspicion that Rishi Sunak simply doesn’t.”Earlier this year, a photo opportunity went awry when Mr. Sunak seemed unsure how to pay at a gas station. More recently, Mr. Sunak’s enemies leaped on reports that he had worn a suit that cost 3,500 pounds, or about $4,300, and that he had worn a pair of £490 Prada loafers on a visit to a construction site. Even his slogan, Ready for Rishi, to some sounds a little entitled.Asked whether he is too prosperous to understand the predicament of ordinary Britons, Mr. Sunak said on Tuesday that he was fortunate to be in his current situation but that he hadn’t been “born like this.” He added: “I think in our country, we judge people not by their bank account; we judge them by their character and their actions.”Speculation that Mr. Sunak’s campaign might have suffered from racism has surfaced, but only rarely. Professor Bale, an expert on the Conservative Party leadership, said that “if it had been a very close race, we would have had to ask whether racism played a part, but given the gap” between Mr. Sunak and Ms. Truss, “it strikes me that it probably hasn’t.”Much more blame has been pointed at a campaign that has not been sure-footed. It began presenting him as the grown-up politician, stressing his fiscal conservatism and his determination to tackle inflation before cutting taxes.But with Ms. Truss’s promises to make quick reductions in taxes, Mr. Sunak has retreated, pledging that he would temporarily suspend the value-added tax, a sales tax, on energy bills — something that he not long ago rejected.“What she’s done, incredibly successfully, is drag him onto her turf,” said Jill Rutter, a former civil servant and a senior fellow at the Institute for Government, a London-based research group, referring to the debate on taxation.Mr. Sunak with his wife, Akshata Murty, second from right, and their daughters. He graduated with a top degree from Oxford University and then attended Stanford University.Peter Nicholls/ReutersAs the contest between the two candidates has become increasingly bitter, Mr. Sunak told the BBC on Wednesday that he would rather lose than “win on a false promise” and would tell people what “they needed to hear” rather than what was easy and expedient.Then there is the role Mr. Sunak played in the ouster of Mr. Johnson by resigning from the cabinet. In fact, all of Mr. Johnson’s would-be successors had positioned themselves for potential bids for months, including Ms. Truss, who wooed fellow lawmakers with drink invitations nicknamed “fizz with Liz.”But she remained in the cabinet to the bitter end, stayed publicly loyal and is benefiting now from a sense among some that Mr. Johnson was betrayed and that Mr. Sunak led the way.“There’s perhaps a feeling of guilt about the defenestration of Boris Johnson which, in some ways, she helps to assuage,” Professor Bale said.In Cardiff, Patricia Johnson, a retired market researcher from Caerphilly, Wales, said she was one of those who think that Mr. Sunak “is not as trustworthy as I would like” and added, “I don’t like the idea that Boris was hoisted from the position that the country put him in.”As for Mr. Sunak’s ability to tackle the problems confronting ordinary Britons, Ms. Johnson was less than convinced. Things, she said, probably look a little different “if you don’t have to worry where the next £3 million is coming from.” More

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Policing Divide Hurt Rep. Ilhan Omar, Who Edged Out a Narrow Primary Win

      by

      Two years ago, Representative Ilhan Omar of Minnesota easily survived her Democratic primary by beating back a fellow progressive. Even though she had become a national lightning rod for attacks from the right and faced staunch opposition from pro-Israel groups that spent millions of dollars in hopes of defeating her, she won her 2020 race by more than 35,000 votes.But on Tuesday, Ms. Omar edged out only a narrow primary victory against a centrist Democrat, coming within 2,500 votes of losing her seat. “Tonight’s victory is a testament to how much our district believes in the collective values we are fighting for and how much they’re willing to do to help us overcome defeat,” Ms. Omar posted on Twitter. To her supporters and her critics, the tight race was a sign that her strong support of a progressive push to overhaul the Minneapolis Police Department had cost her votes. That push, which took the shape of a ballot measure last year, followed the 2020 killing of George Floyd in police custody in Minneapolis, which set off protests and nationwide calls for racial justice and police reform. More than two years later, the issue of policing and accountability continues to deeply divide Democrats.“Most voters, when they call 9-11, they want the police to come right away,” said Michael Meehan, a Democratic strategist, adding that Ms. Omar’s narrow win showed the “punitive power” of the backlash against calls to “defund the police” across the country.For many in Minneapolis, the clashes over policing between Ms. Omar and her main Democratic rival in the primary, Don Samuels, a former Minneapolis city councilman and school board member, were a continuation of last year’s battle over the ballot measure to replace the Minneapolis Police Department with a new Department of Public Safety.Ms. Omar supported the measure, which grew out of the outrage over Mr. Floyd’s murder, when Minneapolis became the center of a push to defund or abolish the police. But moderate Democrats, including Mayor Jacob Frey, called for improving the current department, as an increase in homicides sparked concern.In the end, Minneapolis voters struck the amendment down. Mr. Samuels, who campaigned to defeat the ballot measure and who had the backing of Mr. Frey in the primary, had criticized Ms. Omar for her support of the “defund police” movement. After he conceded his race, Mr. Samuels contended that his opponent was beatable. “If this was the general election, no doubt that we would have won this race,” he said.This time, pro-Israel groups declined to get involved. The political action committee affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee did not respond to requests for comment. They and other groups have opposed Ms. Omar in the past after she made comments about the influence of pro-Israel donors on lawmakers. Her fierce and persistent criticism of Israel has exposed broader tensions between younger Democrats who accuse the Jewish state of human rights abuses and older Democrats who stand behind it.On Wednesday, Ms. Omar’s progressive supporters were feeling relieved, yet also dispirited. “I feel like it shouldn’t have been that close,” said D.A. Bullock, a filmmaker and Minneapolis community activist who supported her campaign. “It was almost like trying to bring her to heel rather than push for better policy.”Sabrina Mauritz, a field director with TakeAction Minnesota, said Ms. Omar won despite the broader backlash because she has been an effective local leader. “The constant fear mongering — it is meant to scare people,” Ms. Mauritz said, referring to the attacks on Ms. Omar and efforts at police reform. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      The Marcos Family Gets Star Treatment in a New Philippines Film

      by

      A big-budget production depicts the family as victims of a political vendetta, a popular narrative during the recent presidential election in the Philippines.MANILA — Even before its opening night last week, “Maid in Malacanang” was shaping up to be the most talked-about film of the year in the Philippines.The almost two-hour drama portrays the Marcos family’s last days in the presidential palace before being forced into exile by a pro-democracy revolt in 1986.“We did everything for this country after World War II, only to be destroyed by the people who yearn for power,” a sobbing Imelda R. Marcos tells her son, Ferdinand Marcos Jr., in one scene. “Remember this, we will never be able to return after we leave. They will do everything so the Filipino people will hate us.”A teary-eyed Mr. Marcos, played by the young actor Diego Loyzaga, consoles his mother as he replies, “I promise, I don’t know how or when, but we will return.”The Marcoses returned to the Philippines in the 1990s, but the family’s biggest comeback happened in May, when Mr. Marcos, the son and namesake of the former dictator, was elected president in the most consequential race in three decades. The release of “Maid in Malacanang,” a big-budget production starring two famous actors, is seen as a sort of victory lap for the new president and his family.Ruffa Gutierrez, who plays former first lady Imelda R. Marcos, shooting a scene on the set of the movie “Maid in Malacanang.”Viva Films“This is a work of truth,” Imee Marcos said at the movie’s premiere. One of Mr. Marcos’s sisters, she was the movie’s creative producer and executive producer. “We waited 36 years for this story to come out.”Despite the corruption and tax evasion cases against the family, many Filipinos consider the Marcoses something like royalty, an idea that the film plays on while furthering the myth that they were victims of a political vendetta.More than 30 million people voted for Mr. Marcos in May, allowing him to clinch the presidency with the largest vote margin in more than 30 years. Nearly half the country believes the family was unjustly forced to flee.But many of Mr. Marcos’s detractors say he won the election because of a yearslong campaign to rewrite Marcos family history and the legacy of the father’s brutal dictatorship. “Maid in Malacanang,” they say, is just the latest attempt to rewrite the narrative.The movie is told through the eyes of three maids who worked for the Marcoses during the years leading up the 1986 People Power revolution, when hundreds of thousands of people marched through the streets of Manila to protest against a family that they saw as corrupt.Imelda R. Marcos, left, arriving in Hawaii on Feb. 26, 1986, the day after the Marcos family’s departure into exile from the Philippines.Carl Viti/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe film portrays the former dictator, Ferdinand E. Marcos, who ruled the Philippines for over two decades, as a soft leader incapable of violence — a popular talking point among Marcos family supporters online. The movie also portrays the Marcoses as ordinary people who love simple food, even as they surround themselves with designer bags and jewelry.What the film does not mention: the widespread public anger over the family’s excesses, such as Imelda Marcos’s 1,060 pairs of shoes. Also missing is any mention of the tens of thousands of people who were tortured during martial law.“I was not alive during the term of president Marcos, but I was surprised to see a different story, different from what I heard from other people,” said Maricar Amores Faypon-Sicat, a moviegoer who saw the film on opening night.“I did not know that he wanted to avoid bloodshed, and until the last minute, he was thinking of the Filipino people,” said Ms. Amores Faypon-Sicat, 29.Darryl Yap, the director, said the decision to make the film came only after the presidential election, though he had done some preliminary work ahead of that time. He said the landslide win for Mr. Marcos was “an overwhelming testament that the Filipino people are ready to hear the side of the Marcoses.”Speaking to a select audience at the July 29 premiere, Mr. Yap said the film was the first time that viewers were given an opportunity to watch a film about the Marcos family that was not based on the opposition’s narrative.Supporters of Ferdinand Marcos Jr. at his campaign headquarters during the presidential election in May. Mr. Marcos’s landslide win was “an overwhelming testament that the Filipino people are ready to hear the side of the Marcoses,” according to Darryl Yap, the director of the movie.Jes Aznar for The New York TimesNot everyone has been receptive.Members of the Roman Catholic clergy condemned the depiction of Corazon Aquino, the leader of the opposition, playing mahjong with nuns from the Carmelite monastery in Cebu Province at the height of the protests. One leader of the church has called for a boycott of the movie.Sister Mary Melanie Costillas, the head of the monastery, said the truth was that the nuns were praying and fasting during the demonstrations, fearful that the elder Mr. Marcos would find Mrs. Aquino, who was sheltering at the monastery to avoid being detained. At that time, there were reports that Mr. Marcos had issued a shoot-to-kill order against Mrs. Aquino.“The attempt to distort history is reprehensible,” Sister Costillas said in a statement. She said that the mahjong scene “would trivialize whatever contribution we had to democracy.”The actress playing Irene Marcos, the Marcoses’ youngest child, fueled outrage after she likened the accusations against the family and the details of the father’s human rights abuses to “gossip.”Corazon Aquino, right, a leader of the opposition, during a rally in February 1986. Members of the clergy have condemned how she and the nuns who sheltered her are portrayed in the movie.Romeo Gacad/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesHistorians and artists say the movie has opened up a new front in the battle against misinformation in the Philippines, taking something that was once mostly online and bringing it into a new domain.“I now feel that the struggle has shifted to the cultural sphere,” said Bonifacio Ilagan, 71, a renowned playwright. He said that the movie mainly targets the younger generation who never experienced martial law. “They are vulnerable to disinformation. They are the market of the film because they lack historical sense.”Mr. Ilagan, who was tortured during the Marcos years, has teamed up with Joel Lamangan, a well-known movie director, to make a film to counter the narrative of “Maid in Malacanang.” Mr. Lamangan was the first member of the local directors guild to publicly denounce the Marcos-backed film as “pure nonsense,” which he said resulted in death threats.They expect financing their project to be a challenge. “It will be an uphill climb because we have no producer and we have no money,” said Mr. Lamangan, 69, who is also a martial law victim. “But we are trying to do crowdfunding.”The Wall of Remembrance at the martial law museum in Manila. The museum honors those who struggled against the dictatorship of Ferdinand E. Marcos.Ezra Acayan for The New York Times“Maid in Malacanang” was bankrolled by a major local film production company known for producing blockbusters in the Philippines.The underlying narrative of the film is centered on the legacy of the elder Mr. Marcos and how people will remember him. In one scene, a wistful Mr. Marcos asks Irene as she begs him to leave the palace: “How will I face my grandchildren? Their grandfather is a soldier, but he retreated from war.”A weeping Irene responds: “I will make sure that the truth will come out and history will tell your grandkids who you really are.”Mr. Marcos tells his daughter that the opposition was “mad at us because we come from the province. They are mad at us because the people love us. But still, I can’t make myself get angry at them.”At the premiere, the audience applauded. More

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      What’s On the Ballot and How to Vote in Connecticut’s Primary

      by

      Connecticut might be known as a campaign fund-raising powerhouse that rarely deviates from electing Democrats statewide, but even its primary on Tuesday is drawing the attention of former President Donald J. Trump.Mr. Trump made a late endorsement in the Republican Senate primary race. Its winner will challenge Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat on whom the former president has aimed his attention.The three-way Republican contest is not the only competitive race on the ballot.Here is a refresher on the rules for voting and what’s at stake.How to voteThe registration deadlines for voting in person and requesting an absentee ballot have passed. Connecticut does not have same-day registration for the primary, though it does for the general election.You have to be registered with a political party to vote in the primary. The cutoff for switching parties is three months before a primary.No-excuse absentee voting is no longer available in Connecticut, which mailed ballots to all voters at the onset of the pandemic. A referendum would be required for it to be reinstated.Where to voteClick here to look up your assigned place to vote. Absentee ballots must be returned — by mail or by hand to drop boxes or local clerks — by Tuesday at 8 p.m. Eastern time, which is also when the polls close for in-person voting.What is on the ballotRepublicans will winnow the field of candidates for the Senate, the House in southwestern Connecticut and secretary of the state, an open-seat race to decide who will oversee elections.Democrats have competitive primaries for state treasurer and secretary of the state.Voters will also decide various intraparty races for the Connecticut Legislature. Click here for your sample ballot. More