Bukele: what 'model' are we talking about?

Nayib Bukele was “re-elected” as president of El Salvador on February 4;

and he would have “devastated” the Legislative Assembly as he himself said.

The most prudent qualification for this electoral process would be “complete farce.”

Nothing less.

Four aspects strongly illustrate this statement:

First, demonstrating who is in charge, the result was announced by Bukele himself.

This election was not only presidential, but also for the Legislative Assembly, whose control he sought.

This meant the evaporation of the electoral authority, whose impartiality is fundamental in any democratic election.

This detail only contributes to suspicion and lack of transparency in the entire process.

Once the vote was over, the electoral authority lost relevance, and Bukele assumed control.

The process was so rude that several days later four of the five substitute judges of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal separated themselves from the vote counting process to define the seats to be elected in the legislature, due to the irregularities.

Second, clear principles of balance of powers, respect for constitutional legality and those that establish that “access to power” must be given “subject to the rule of law” were destroyed.

Immediate presidential re-election in El Salvador is prohibited, invalidating the supposed “election” of Bukele, who could not even have been a candidate.

However, this did not stop him from running, showing a clear disregard for democratic norms and the rule of law.

Fundamental rules all violated in the face of an American continent silent in the face of abuses, which have not yet ended.

Third, international legality.

The inter-American community should not have remained silent in the face of this outrage.

An American continent that, in fact, basically stood “in profile” in the face of the subjugation, not only of the Constitution but of clear current international standards adopted by the inter-American system such as those contained in the Inter-American Democratic Charter.

Adopted unanimously by the countries of America in September 2011, it specifies that among the “essential elements” of democracy (art. 3), there are several core elements.

With impunity, Bukele dispelled them in his way of governing and for this election: “Access to power and its exercise subject to the rule of law;

…and the separation and independence of public powers.”

Which also means, in accordance with the Charter, respect for “…freedom of expression and of the press.”

Fourth, the recent electoral process is just one example of the growing concentration of power in the hands of Bukele, which has resulted in a significant deterioration of democratic institutions in El Salvador.

This government model has been criticized for its incompatibility with democratic principles and for its constant violations of fundamental rights.

Katya Salazar, executive director of the Due Process Foundation (DPLF), has highlighted actions of the “Bukele phenomenon”, totally incompatible with democratic societies or that aspire to be so.

A few months after coming to power, the presence of the Armed Forces in the Legislative Assembly on his orders to intimidate its members was a first warning sign.

Then, the members of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court, which had been a kind of counterweight to the Executive and its aspiration for absolute power, were all dismissed by Bukele.

Subsequently, the replacements for those dismissed were appointed completely outside the established process.

Finally, it was those irregularly appointed who issued the unconstitutional decision to allow immediate presidential re-election, despite the fact that several articles of the Constitution expressly prohibit it.

`

In effect, the dismantling of the essential pieces of institutional control is underway at an accelerated and unpunished pace.

The concentration of power and violations of fundamental rights includes the destruction of freedom of expression.

The most visible and scandalous thing is now expressed, for example, in the attack on the valuable independent publication

El Faro

, now closed and its directors persecuted by the Government.

Indeed, everything is doubly dark and in head-on collision with the most basic democratic standards.

Faced with this collapse of democratic institutions, there is a great paradox: is this the “model” that captivates some deluded currents of opinion in Latin America to confront crime?

The Government of an autocrat can be a “model”, violating the most fundamental democratic institutions and terrifying process of authoritarian concentration of power (which, we know, usually ends very badly for societies).

Certainly, in Latin American history the way Bukele was re-elected and concentrated power is not much different from how several other Latin American autocrats did it: Batista, Somoza, Trujillo, Fujimori, Ortega or Chávez.

Just some examples - among many others - of similar formats.

All of them adjusted the legal norms to put them at the service of the presidential re-election, they used the state apparatus for their benefit in the campaign and later for corruption.

Bukele Model

: undermining of democracy

The so-called

Bukele model

is, therefore, among other things, the devious undermining of democracy.

Does Latin America want to follow a “model” that entails all of that?

Some argue that all of this served to fulfill a desirable social objective, which is to reduce crime in El Salvador.

However, the collapse of the balance of powers and democratic institutions is not linked to or a tool for crime control, but rather with the simple desire to accumulate absolute power.

The history of the continent indicates where these types of processes were previously directed: excessive corruption, and poor management of public finances that ends up seriously affecting the population.

Signs of this are already observed in El Salvador.

Michael Shifter, former president of the Inter-American Dialogue, mentions in a recent article in

El Faro

that El Salvador's economic performance is disappointing, even by current poor Central American standards, and recalls that, according to World Bank figures, foreign investment in the country has fallen under the Bukele Government.

On the other hand, he points out that “credible investigations have already revealed corruption scandals around Bukele,” and that there are no signs that this will change.

These two elements are serious consequences of the model in question.

Excuse for absolute power

In the short term, the control of insecurity - a severe problem in El Salvador - is what has generated Bukele's popularity, and has served as an excuse to accumulate absolute power.

The drop in crime is a fact.

Yes. But there is valuable information available that should not allow us to “look aside” in the face of the authoritarian phenomenon that attacks El Salvador today.

The current emergency regime has made permanent regulations that violate basic rules of due process and raise fundamental questions about the “model” of citizen security.

The recent report on short-term disappearances committed during the state of emergency in El Salvador is very useful.

Prepared by the DPLF in collaboration with the World Organization against Torture (OMCT), the Center for Civil and Political Rights (CCPR), Cristosal, the Institute of Human Rights of the UCA (IDHUCA) and the Passionist Social Service (SSPAS) , sheds light on an alarming situation that requires the world's attention.

According to this valuable report, massive and indiscriminate arrests of more than 71,000 people have been carried out in El Salvador, among which there are thousands of innocent people.

The majority of arrests have been accompanied by the systematic refusal to provide information to their families about the status of people detained by the police and prison authorities.

There are no immediate reports of detained persons, nor any judicial control of the arrests.

The trials are massive, and behaviors are not individualized.

Sentencing in absentia is allowed and judges' identities are confidential.

The majority of those affected are young people in poverty, accused of the crime of “illicit groups,” under a legal wording of such breadth that it allows arrests of people without any basis.

There has not been so much impunity since the civil war.

Several examples, which are mentioned in the report, show an unacceptable pattern of State action.

For example, people who are captured by the police or military, in application of the state of emergency, in public places, in the presence of witnesses.

When their relatives later go to different police centers to request information, it is denied that the arrest occurred and the whereabouts of the detained person are hidden.

In several cases, detainees die in detention without their families being informed.

The report mentions, as examples, the names of Henry Joya, Rafael López and Noelia García.

Henry Joya was detained for more than a year without official information about his arrest.

The authorities eventually provided information to his relatives during the first two months, but then stopped informing them about his health.

Given the lack of information, they went to the Institute of Legal Medicine (IML), where they recognized his body through photographs.

Henry had been buried on July 8 in a mass grave.

According to the report issued by the IML, Henry would have died due to pulmonary edema.

However, a witness who shared a cell with him at the Mariona penitentiary center told the family that Joya had been subjected to severe beatings by the guards and that he died as a result of them.

Rafael López was arrested at his workplace located in Jucuapa, Usulután.

According to his family, four police officers from the Jucuapa police station arrested him for the alleged crime of “illegal groups” and transferred him to a prison.

From that moment on, the authorities denied them information about Rafael and his state of health.

Two months later, when completing an administrative procedure, the family was belatedly informed of his death: he had “health complications” and was transferred to the Zacamil Hospital, where he died on June 1.

He was buried 20 days later, and as in many other cases, without notifying his family and in a common grave.

Noelia García was arrested on June 14, 2022, at her home in Santa Ana. She was transferred to a police station, where the police only allowed her family to give her some items of clothing.

That same day she was sent to a penitentiary center and, from there, the authorities stopped providing the family with information about her location and health situation.

On January 23, 2023, Noelia's family found out, through their own means, that she had been rushed to a hospital.

Finally, on February 1, 2023, through social networks, the family learned that an unidentified person had died in a hospital.

It was later confirmed that she was Noelia.

Questionable emergency measures

Everything indicates that, so far, society seems to look the other way at the possibility of families spending a few days without violence and murders by the gangs and paying a high price for it.

As it is said in the DPLF report…”until it is your turn.”

Is the situation sustainable?

The emergency measures only address the issue from a criminal perspective and there is nothing about prevention or rehabilitation.

What is being done with the factors that feed the gangs?

There is no known comprehensive project or plan, with a stagnant economy and falling foreign investment, to address this long-standing problem.

Finally, what is going to happen with the mass trials of those more than 70,000 detainees?

Sooner or later they will be legally questioned and, perhaps, much will go to waste (as happened in part with anti-terrorist processes in Peru).

Bukele's unconstitutional "triumph" - with forceps - sends a dangerous message to the region: democratic values ​​are an obstacle to governing, if some righteous people pay for sinners, it is part of the cost that must be paid.

Latin American societies and the entire world have enough information - or can easily access it - to not put themselves "in profile" and not invent "models" but to design institutionally appropriate strategies to combat crime.

This does not require destroying democracy or generating new autocrats, the region already had too many of them.

Subscribe here to the

EL PAÍS América

newsletter and receive all the key information on current events in the region

Subscribe to continue reading

Read without limits

Keep reading

I am already a subscriber

_