Level of
Democracy: Colombia
Colombia has a
strong democratic tradition. Since it won the independence from Spain in 1819,
it has only experienced two military interventions interrupting long periods of
stable democracy, one during the mid-nineteenth century and another one at the
response to “La Violencia – The Violence”, the confrontation between the two
traditional political parties.
This period of “La Violencia” began with the
assassination of the popular political leader Jorge Eliecer Gaitan in 1948 and
ended in 1958 when the two parties decided to alternate the power in a called
“power-sharing agreement” known as the “National Front”. However, the not
inclusion of other political views and the poor rural population contributed to
the conformation of the revolutionary guerrilla group in the 1960s, its name
FARC (today a political party).
The growing presence of the guerrilla groups and the
absence of the government’s presence in the rural areas, actively supported the
creation of right-wing self-defense groups commonly knows as “Paramilitares”
during the late 1980s and 1990s.
After the end of the cold war and the fall of the
Soviet Union, the FARC lost its financial support, which led to the group to be
involved in the narcotics business, fact that transformed the economic, social,
political, historical context of Colombia forever as we know it today. This
historical background leads us to the actual level of democracy in Colombia, a
country recognized as partially free[1]
with a liberal democracy but with a lot of improvements pending to be
implemented.
 |
| Retrato de Colombia (Colombia's Portrait) - Debora Arango (Source: El Colombiano) |
A liberal democracy is described as a political system
that requires free and fair elections as well as guaranteed constitutional
protection of civil and political rights such as the rule of law, separation of
powers, liberties of speech, assembly, religion and property[2].
The Colombian case in terms of democracy has been
characterized in many different ways. Bruce Bagley[3]
questions whether the term “democracy” should be even be used to identify the
political system in Colombia during the National Front period (1958 to 1974),
and suggest that describing it as a “inclusionary authoritarian regime” would
be more appropriate. William Avilés[4]
calls it a “low-intensity democracy”, referring to the low level of effective
citizen participation, and Manuel Trujillo draws on Guillermo O’Donnell’s term
of “delegative democracy” to describe the political situation in Colombia under
the Uribe’s administration. Bejarano and Pizarro refer to Colombia as a
“besieged democracy” where the adequate functioning of democracy is hindered by
extra-institutional rather than intra-institutional forces, and that its main
failure is the inability to establish the rule of law[5].
All these points of view are related with the actual
condition of the democracy in Colombia and all of them are seen as a result and
consequence of the historical background exposed before.
One of the most important factors for become a full
democratic state is the freedom of speech and press. Governmental and guerrilla
groups have impacted Colombia’s definite adoption of free speech. The current
situation in Colombia for free speech is rather promising. The Government signed
a new access to information law, and with this law Colombian citizens are able
to exercise their right to information as a fundamental right of liberty. This
advance shows the progress and steps the government is taking to rescue a
country and citizens that have been oppressed thought history. However, drug
trafficking is still an issue, but increasing amount of citizens is using
social-networking and digital communication as an effective tool against
censorship and violence[6].
Contradictory to the degree of hope presented in the
current Colombia’s situation, the country ranks 129 out of 180 in the world
press freedom index, basically because Colombia’s journalist continue to be
threatened by “bacrims”, gangs of former paramilitaries now involving in drug trafficking.
Physical attacks, death threats and murders are still common; with the result
that Colombia is one of the western hemisphere’s most dangerous countries for
the press[7].
Criminal groups still use the violence to silence alternative media that try to
cover their illegal activities, this violence, sometimes complicit with local
officials, often goes unpunished and at the end this is one of the most
important factors for the erosion of the democracy in the country.
To understand more this perceptions of the democracy
in Colombia, a view on the election’s process is needed. Elections in Colombia
are regulated and controlled by the National Electoral Council. Colombia elects
on national level the president and the legislature. Colombia had a two-party system,
in which it could be difficult for third parties to find success. However,
recently, the number of independent candidates has tended to shows signs that
past electoral trends may be wakening and the potential for diversity could be
increasing[8].
For the election in 2018, will be the first elections
in the Colombia’s history, where the rebel group FARC will participate as a
political party. The rebels signed a historic peace deal with the government in
2016. This agreement guarantee the former fighter 10 seats in the congress, at
the same time, the new party will get the same amount of financial support the
government give to the 13 other political parties in Colombia.
During the last decade and a half, Colombia has
witnessed both and improvement in the dimensions of political participation and
contestation and a severe deterioration in the dimensions related to effective
protection of the civil liberties and subordination of the military. With this
in mind, the Colombian political regime is difficult to classify, since it is
neither a full democracy nor an authoritarian regime.
The current situation of Colombia’s democracy can be
conceived as a game being played on two fields simultaneously (Bejarano and
Pizarro, 2002), there is an electoral field (where the rules of the democratic
game are largely respected among legally recognized political actors) and an
extra-institutional field (where the rules of war rather than the rules of
democracy apply, including the accumulation of instruments of force, territory
and arms)[9].
Now it is important to analyze the perception of the
Colombian regarding democracy. According to the Americas Barometer, 70% of the
polled Colombians consider that the country is almost democratic and only 5%
have the perception of living under a regime or a system not democratic.
Additionally, 60% of the Colombians say that are satisfied or high satisfied
with the democracy. To understand this perception, is important to take a look
on the question what is the meaning of “Democracy” for Colombian people.
For Colombians, living under democracy means freedom
of expression (15,4%), participation (8,3%), freedom, elections, and the right
to choose its leaders, human rights, peace and justice. However, 31,3% of the
polled does not find any meaning for democracy[10].
With this result, Colombia appears as one of the Latin-American countries,
after El Salvador and Dominican Republic, where the citizens have a low or
empty meaning about democracy. This is a problem and disappointing not only for
the country itself but also for the efforts of people to develop the levels of
democracy in the region. The government needs to increase the efforts
empathizing the meaning of the democracy in the national education programs
because this may be an important factor in the actual level of democracy in the
country.
In addition, is helpful also to analysis the so called
democracy Index, this is an index compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit
and tries to measure the sate of the democracy in 167 countries, 165 of them
are UN members states. The first publication was produced in 2006; this index
is based on 60 indicators that measure pluralism, civil liberties and political
culture. At the end, the countries are classified in four types of regimes:
full democracies, flawed democracies, hybrid regimes and authoritarian regimes.
According to this report, Colombia is number 57 in the
rank and number 10 in the regional rank (Latin America), being this democracy
flagged as “Flawed Democracy”. According to this index, Colombia is a country
that has free and fair elections, where may occur problems with infringements
on media freedom but basic civil liberties are respected. However there are
significant weaknesses in other aspects of democracy, including problems in
governance, and underdeveloped political culture and low levels of political
participation[11].
 |
| Democracy Index 2016. The Economist |
Colombia ranks 57th with a score of 6.67 out of 10.
The lowest ratings were in the short ranks of political participation (4.4) and
political culture (4.38), which are caused by high rates of electoral
abstinence and political apathy in the country.
Politicians and internationalists consulted consider
that although Colombia has "very weak" political institutions,
elections are carried out in the country according to an electoral calendar, the
results of the elections are respected, there is the right to dissent and to
oppose, there are freedom of the press and there is significant progress in
recognizing differences, orientations, cults and identities[12].
The last presidential period has supported an
ambitious agenda for social reform, passing a victims and land restitution law
in 2011 and initiating talks with the Revolutionary armed forces of Colombia in
2012. The negotiation process was concluded in December 2016 with the passage
of revised accords in the Colombian congress. In response, the Congress must
pass legislation that will allow for implementation of reforms required by the
accords addressing rural development, political participation, drug
trafficking, amnesty and victim’s rights[13].
All these social reforms will have an effect on the gaps presented in the
social structure of the country, at the end, all the social differences impact
directly to the level of democracy. As conclusion, Colombia has a lot to do in
order to become a full democracy, however consistent efforts have been
implemented to contribute in the improvement of the levels of democracy.
[1] Freedom in the World 2017. Freedom
House. Colombia Profile.
[2] Larry Diamond, Elections without
Democracy: Thinking about hybrid regimes. Journal of Democracy 13. No. 2, 2002.
[3] Dr. Bruce M. Bagley. University of
Miami College of arts and science. PhD. Political Science.
[4] Dr. William Aviles. University of
Nebraska Kearney. Comparative Politics, Latin American Politics.
[5] An Analysis of Colombia’s
Democracy. Roberto Lorente. April 15, 2010
[6] Free Speech and Free Press around
the world. Colombia. Ernest Macias. April, 2014
[7] World Press Freedom Index 2017.
Reporters without borders.
[8] The Green Party was second in the
presidential elections in 2010
[9] From ”Restricted” to “Besieged”:
The changing nature of the limits to Democracy in Colombia. Ana Bejarano.
Eduardo Pizarro. National University of Colombia. January 2005.
[10]
Cultura Politica de la Democracia en Colombia. Americas Barometer. USAID. 2006
[11] Democracy Index 2016. The Economist
Intelligence Unit. 2017
[13]
National Democratic Institue. Colombia, 2017
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario