Progressive Electoral Reforms Manipulated to Maintain the Power of the Right

The single identity card (DUI is the acronym in Spanish) has been an election reform demanded by international observers, and supported by the main opposition party, the FMLN (and finally agreed to by ARENA), since the 1994 elections.  Currently, a national identity card and a separate voter card are required of the citizens of El Salvador in order to exercise their vote.  However, the implementation of the DUI has been manipulated to serve undemocratic ends. 

In 1996, the National Registration of Natural Persons (RNPN) was created in conjunction with the DUI process.  The RNPN was created to form a centralized and systematized national register.  The mayor's office of each municipality was to pass register information to the centralized RNPN, thus facilitating the maintenance of the electoral register.  The electoral register is to be updated according to the RNPN register.  Since there is such a close relationship between the RNPN and the electoral register, the RNPN should be a dependent of the TSE (Supreme Electoral Tribunal), as it is in Costa Rica.  The FMLN studied the Costa Rican system and proposed that TSE be in charge of the RNPN, thus allowing a multi-party institution control over the electoral register. The multi-party TSE would act as a type of check-and-balance so as not to let one party manipulate the institution for its electoral ends.[1]

ARENA finally accepted the idea of creating the RNPN and initiating the DUI process. However, through the political alliance of the Right block, it crafted the reforms to meet its own needs.  In fact, ARENA agreed to create the RNPN, but placed it under the control of the Executive government, not the TSE.  Therefore, in El Salvador, there is only one political party that directly controls the national register and thus, the emission of the DUI, which is an electoral document.  The single-party controlled RNPN also then indirectly controls the electoral register, since the electoral register is based on the national register.  If the RNPN decides not to pass the information on the TSE, the TSE cannot update the electoral register.  In addition, the RNPN could decide to register certain groups and exclude others in order to favor its own electoral needs.

Once ARENA controlled the RNPN, it contracted DOCUSAL (a private company with a majority of Mexican capital) to produce and issue the DUI.  According to FMLN Deputy Walter Durán, the costs of producing and issuing the DUI with DOCUSAL were five times greater than issuing the DUI directly through the RNPN. The direct emission of the DUI would have facilitated the DUI being free of charge for the citizenry.  However, as it was, DOCUSAL stated it would charge around US $11.00 dollars per DUI.  Voting is a basic right, and when, according to the UN, around a quarter of the population has a daily income of less than a dollar a day; this cost would essentially take this fundamental basic right away from a significant percent of the population.  Through international donations, the DUI will be free of charge until December of 2002. 

Recently, there have been serious accusations that the RNPN has not been carrying out its responsibilities, thus undermining the process of updating the electoral register.  The RNPN has responded by stating the responsibility lies with DOCUSAL.  However, DOCUSAL has nothing to do with maintaining the national register; it only deals with issuing the DUI, based on the records of the RNPN.

The residential voting system is also to be implemented at the same time as the DUI takes effect.  The current system is based on surnames and in many cases requires voters to walk various kilometers, as is the case in the countryside, in order to exercise their vote.  Additionally, in larger cities, spouses are required to vote at different centers since the voting system is based on last names and not residency.  The new system is to be based on where one resides, and people will be able to vote at the voting center nearest to their residence.  The DUI is linked with the implementation of residential voting because the RNPN needs to know the official residency location of each voter.  Therefore, when each voter goes to obtain their DUI, they will answer a question regarding their place of residence and will be assigned to vote at the voting center nearest their place of abode.  

The original plan was that the DUI and residential voting would be implemented for the first time in the March 2003 elections.  This would mean that all of the DUIs would have to be issued by November, since the electoral register closes in November and campaigning begins.  However, the ARENA-controlled RNPN and DOCUSAL appear to be stalling.  As of 22 April, only 23.49% of the registered voters have received their DUIs and in 8 of the 14 departments of El Salvador, DUI coverage is less than 20%.[2]

DOCUSAL was consulted to verify if the DUI could still be used for 2003. In response, DOCUSAL stated it would be possible, but they needed more production and distribution capacity.  As a result, DOCUSAL was pressured to set up more DUI Centers, which are responsible for issuing the document.  DOCUSAL agreed to add 9 mobile centers to the list of 28 permanent centers.  However, this is not enough.  According to the TSE, for the 2003 elections only 2,629,023 voters out of 3,610,000 would have their DUI, even with the 9 mobile centers.[3]  DOCUSAL has not agreed to set up more centers, possibly fearing a loss of profits.  In some municipalities the projected percentage of DUI coverage by November is only around 25%.[4] 

Due to the stalling measures and the lack of efficiency, the DUI would not be viable for the 2003 elections. In many municipalities only a minority of the population would have the document, thus thwarting democratic electoral processes.  For these reasons the FMLN has decided to take the position of waiting until the 2004 elections to implement the DUI and the residential vote.  Recently, ARENA has been publicly pushing for the use of the DUI for the 2003 elections.

Why is ARENA, who initially resisted the DUI process, now pushing for the DUI in the 2003 elections?  There is a mathematical hypothesis.  In the last legislative and municipal elections, ARENA pulled in around 15% of the total number of possible voters, by reducing the total number of voters – which would happen if the DUI were used – and by controlling the RNPN, ARENA could assure that its voters receive DUIs while the rest of the parties lose a significant portion of their voting pools because they will not have their DUI.   In this way ARENA could, theoretically, increase the total percentage of ARENA votes in the 2003 elections.[5]

The maneuvers regarding the DUI and residential voting are not the only electoral issues being manipulated.  On 22 May, it was made public that the Supreme Court of El Salvador would most certainly rule that the Constitution was being violated regarding the distribution of legislative deputies.  Article 79 of the Constitution of El Salvador established that Legislative Deputies are to be distributed by a "system of proportional representation".  Each vote should have the same weight.  The traditional system of distributing deputies has been arbitrary and included a “national slate” – made up of 20 deputies. The other 64 deputies were distributed among the 14 departments.  However, the distribution was not based on a proportional system.  For example, a deputy from the department of San Salvador represents 94,507 Salvadorans while a deputy from Morazán represents only 46,142.[6]  Another example is that a deputy from La Libertad had to win 26,438 votes in order to be a deputy while a deputy from San Vicente only won 3,325 votes.[7]  The system favored smaller parties.  Particularly, the system benefited small Right-wing parties such as the PCN and the PDC the most by assuring at least 3 deputies from 3 different parties from each department.  For example, if a proportional system had been implemented in the 2000 elections, 5 departments would have been allocated only 2 deputies and not 3.  This means that 5 of the current 12 PCN deputies would not have been deputies.[8]    

Anticipating the court’s ruling, in an attempt to look like the “good guys” who are initiating democratic electoral reforms, the Right block passed a “reform” that "erases" Article 12 of the Electoral Code, which set up the old system of distribution. It was this particular article that violated the Constitution, which establishes proportional representation.  The reform was essentially nothing more than the old Article 12 restated and decorated with new rhetoric.  Even the Right-wing press reported this.   Roxana Huezo of La Prensa Gráfica commented, “…the deputies (ARENA, PCN and PDC) maintained the distribution contained in the article (12) almost without any changes.  They didn't even eliminate the national slate, one of the principal points that violated the constitution…"[9] 

MIRE (Independent Movement for Electoral Reform) and the FMLN criticized the hurried reform.  The president of MIRE, Roberto Lorenzana (not to be confused with Deputy Roberto Lorenzana) proclaimed, "The national slate should be eliminated.  Not doing so would be sluggishness of mind."[10]  MIRE and the FMLN announced that they will place another demand in the Supreme Court against the reform.  The reform was indeed hurried, but far from suffering some type of mental laziness, the deputies of the Right have launched a complex attack to manipulate and press forward what were once progressive reforms in order to defend their power and ultimately, their socio-economic order.

Back to top

Pending Privatization of Health Care through Loan Conditions

The ARENA government continues on its privatization path, intensifying its privatization plan for the health care sector.  On 11 January the Executive signed a loan agreement with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (The World Bank)[11].  The loan is now in the Legislative Assembly, where its ratification is being debated.

The World Bank loan in the Assembly is for US $142.6 million dollars.  Due to the amount of the loan (equivalent to about 61% of the national health budget for 2002) and the nature of the conditioning clauses, this loan, if passed as is, will have an extremely negative impact on Salvadorans.  The goal of the conditions of the loan is to slowly and surely force the privatization of the health care sector.  The text of the project reads “The adoption of the decentralization and institutional strengthening is a condition for the disbursement of the investments of Phase 1 supported through this component and the implementation of the strategy is a condition for the disbursement of the investment funds for Phase II.”[12]  This strategy is a familiar privatization strategy that the Inter-American Development Bank has pushed on other countries. As the Colegio Médico of El Salvador - an umbrella union group of doctors’ unions from public hospitals, the Salvadoran Institute of Social Security (STISSS), and the private sector - has pointed out, “Separation of functions, decentralization, return, autonomy of management, duty agreements, and contracts and incentives for the providers are all elements of a an old formula that the IADB has prescribed for the health care systems of Latin American countries with proven negative affects…”[13]

The government has responded to the resistance by trying to paint the STISSS, the doctors of the Colegio Médico, other social groups opposed to the privatization of health care, and the FMLN as being opposed to “progress” and blocking reconstruction.  For example, on 10 May, the Vice-Minister of Public Health stood outside the Maternity Hospital, in an attempt to blame the FMLN for the poor conditions of the public hospital, and “exhorted” the deputies to approve the loans.[14]   The Vice-Minister then promised that the hospital would not be privatized, apparently not worried that he was contradicting the same loan strategy he was pushing to pass.

The Colegio Médico published its criticisms of this particular loan and its proposal in La Prensa Gráfica on 16 May.   The Colegio Médico pointed out that the decentralization strategy includes the replacement of the department head offices with “Health Management Units”, known as SIBASIs (Basic System of Integral Health).  The SIBASI manual published by the Ministry of Health points out its support for privatization: “It supports the…participation of all providers of the health care sector…” The Colegio Médico also pointed out that the loan project is lacking a technical foundation (mortality studies, hospital mortality rate, demographic changes, qualitative and quantitative indicators) and a design model (benefiting population, cost per hospital, dimensions of the hospital, geographic locations, number of beds, equipment, necessary personnel, surgery procedures, required technology, organizational model, etc.).  They also pointed out the exclusive manner in which the project was negotiated, not taking into consideration the Integrated Health Reform Proposal of the doctors and other health care  workers.  In general they oppose the "commercialization" of health based on the market system. 

Other prominent individuals and institutions - the Mayor of Soyapango, the Mayor of Santo Tomás, the Association of Women "Melida Anaya Montes" (MAM), Las Dignas, the Workers Union of the Salvadoran Institute of Social Security (STISSS), Tutela Legal of the Archbishop's Office, among others - also pointed out similar problems with the loan project in a paid advertisement published on 22 May in La Prensa Gráfica.  A summary of their observations follows:

All of the above actors basically coincide in their proposal to the Legislative Assembly.  The two proposals can be summarized as follows:

1. Approve component I - regarding reconstruction of hospitals, component II, and part of component IV dealing with administration of the first two components. 

2. Eliminate the privatization formula contained in component III and replace it with an inclusive modernization based on the content of the Integral Health Reform Proposal

3. Form the Follow-up Commission of the Integral Health Reform Proposal. 

The FMLN supports the social movement's position regarding the loan and has stated it will not give its votes until the demands are met.  However, the deciding votes lie with the Renovators, the small group of 5 deputies that separated from the FMLN.  With their 5 votes, the Right block could pass the loan.  According to La Prensa Gráfica, all the Renovators are asking is that there be a clause that "The Ministry of Health establish direct communication with the members of the Colegio Médico."[15]  Members of the health workers movement have approached the Renovators, reminding them how important of an issue this is.  The question is whether or not the Renovators hold out enough to assure substantial changes to the project.  Knowing that the elections are near, and knowing the magnitude of the consequences of the loan - therefore the polarizing positions regarding the loan - the Renovators' decision will be defining and decisive for their newly formed fraction. 

Back to top

State of Reconstruction

Concertación Ciudadana released a study in May on the state of reconstruction in El Salvador after the earthquakes of January and February 2001.  This study has once again brought the issue of reconstruction back into the public light.  To combat the criticisms presented by various organizations and institutions, the government has launched a publicity event entitled, “Feria del Progreso” (The Progress Fair).  The event will take place in the International Convention Center.  Even though the government is spending resources on advertisements in the daily newspapers, television, and on billboards, the lack of reconstruction still has the overwhelming majority of earthquake victims living in inhuman conditions. In many cases the government’s own statistics do more to prove this than to disprove it.

The Concertación Ciudadana study, “State of the Reconstruction in El Salvador: One Year after the Earthquakes of January and February 2001" is self-defined as being of an “Ethnomethodological” character.  Their informational base came from three sources:

1. Gathering and analysis of all existing documents related to reconstruction

2. Visiting the 71 most affected municipalities to collect information with a  “quanti-qualitative” instrument, in addition to observing and interviews.

3. Special activities including exploratory groups, interviews, verification, press follow-up, photographs.  All of the instruments are valid in the field and are based on a problem and hypothesis.[16]

The reconstruction of permanent housing to a large degree has simply not been carried out.  It is important to remember that even before the earthquakes of 2001 there was a serious housing deficit in El Salvador.  In addition, many people were/are still living in the temporal structures built after the 1986 earthquake.  It can be concluded that it has never been a government priority to assure humane living conditions for all of its citizens.  Of the 71 municipalities studied, 118,823 homes were destroyed and as of 6 March 2002 only 10,497 houses had been rebuilt while 12,447 were in process.  This means there is a deficit of 94,594 houses, which is equivalent to 79.7%.  In other words, over a year after the earthquakes the government has only helped to rebuild 8.8% of the total houses destroyed.  The great majority of victims are living in inhumane and unhealthy conditions.[17] 

The government, according to its Progress Fair propaganda, stated that it has rebuilt 41,340 houses, out of a total of 164,000[18].  Even if this were true - however the ads do not specify if that number includes permanent and temporal structures or just permanent.  Nor do they specify if that number includes projects in progress - that would mean that a year and a half after the earthquakes, the government has helped to reconstruct 25% of the houses destroyed, which means it would take 6 years to help provide housing for the victims of the earthquakes.  If reconstruction continues at the rate documented by the Concertación Ciudadana, it would take over 11 years to rebuild the houses destroyed by the earthquakes.

With respect to the legalization of land, the Concertación Ciudadana’ study reports, “According to the data obtained to this date, 23,175 cases have been legalized, 10, 416 are in process while the real deficit is 20,015 cases; to this there is to add the constant complaint that the mechanisms of legalization are bureaucratic and slow, not having a created a special procedure adapted to the situation.”[19]

From the statistics, including the governments, it is evident that the reconstruction after the earthquakes has not been sufficient or efficient.  The lack of resources can not be a legitimate excuse, since the government projected that the amount needed to cover the emergency and the reconstruction was US $350 million and the government has received US $523.66 million.[20] Thus there are also serious issues of transparency and efficiency to be addressed.  Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of Salvadorans are surviving in inhuman and unhealthy conditions.

Back to top

May Day March and the Attack on Social Organizing

On 1 May, International Workers’ Day, tens of thousands of Salvadorans took to the streets to protest the government’s neoliberal policies.  The first march rallied around 15,000 Salvadorans and included five blocs.  Bloc 1 was formed by unions, which included the STISSS (health care workers union), STSEL (electrical sector union), SUTTEL (telecommunications workers union), ANDES, (teachers’ union), among others.  Bloc 2 was conformed of the agricultural sector, which included the farm workers’ association ANTA.  Bloc 3 was made up marginal communities affected by the freeway loop around San Salvador.  Bloc 4 was the Movement in Solidarity with Popular Struggle, which showed its solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for self-determination and the Chávez government in Venezuela.  Bloc 5 was the FMLN.  This march ended with two firery speeches against privatization and the neoliberal policies of the government by two prominent union leaders; Ricardo Monge (Secretary General of STISSS) and Alirio Romerio (Secretary General of STSEL).  Salvador Sánchez Cerén of the FMLN also spoke, reaffirming the party’s dedication to struggling against neoliberalism and its unifying strategic vision, which is summed up in its slogan “There is no social struggle that is not political and there is no political struggle that is not social.”

The second march was organized by the Concertación Social y Laboral and included unions such groups as SIGESAL (Rosales Hospital workers' union) and SIMETRISSS (doctors' union of the Salvadoran health care system), Las Dignas (Women’s movement organization), student groups, among others.  This march rallied 6,000-8,000 people who demonstrated against the government’s neoliberal policies and also included a Palestinian contingency that protested in front of the Israeli embassy in San Salvador.  In addition, the marchers waved Cuban, Palestinian, and Venezuelan flags as a sign of international solidarity.

The press was manipulated to carry out an attack on the FMLN and other groups of the social movement.  Schafik Hándal, head of the FMLN legislative fraction, gave a motivational speech reaffirming its struggle against neoliberalism.  Hándal also talked of the “lessons” learned from the recent coup failure in Venezuela.  Particularly he spoke of the need for an organized united mass movement.  He also spoke of the role of the media in the coup attempt on the Chávez government.  After his speech, reporters irreverently approached Hándal with the aim of provoking a verbal confrontation.  On 2 May the two major dailies, La Prensa Gráfica and El Diario de Hoy, reported that Hándal had instigated violent attacks on the press and stated that the FMLN does not respect the free press, a similar strategy that the elite used on the Chávez government.  To further its slanderous campaign El Diario de Hoy took photos from the second march and placed them in a context to make the readers believe the incidents had taken place in the march in which the FMLN had participated.[21]  This is yet another example of the Right taking hold of a criticism of the social movement, namely the lack of freedom of the press due to the concentrated ownership which uses the media to protect and further their interests, and putting the blame on political actors working for structural change. 

After carrying out its propaganda campaign the ARENA-appointed National Civilian Police chief, Mauricio Sandoval, announced, in the context of discussing the marches, that “the day is near when all leaders of radical groups are captured.”[22]  The idea of the elite is that anyone who opposes the neoliberal model is a criminal needing to be captured.  Such a stance and rhetoric is reminiscent of the intolerance and repression that preceded the war.

Nevertheless, the outpouring on International Workers’ Day and the increasing social and political movement can be seen as very positive at this important historical juncture.  For this very reason, those who hold economic, and therefore political, power are reacting in such a manner.  They sense and fear a possible change on the horizon. 

Back to top

Notes