[1] El Salvador Proceso, “La Ley de Defensa Nazional”, Aug. 21, 2002: 15.

[1] Cabrera Amadeo, “TSE difiere sobre reforma Código”, La Prensa Grafica, Aug. 19 2002: 8.

[2] Ibid.

Back to top

I. DEFENSE LAW CAUSES INDIGNATION, SEEN AS A RETURN TO THE PAST

On August 15, after months of discussion, ARENA and its allies in the Legislative Assembly passed the National Defense Law, which, according to NGOs, journalists, the social movement and the FMLN violates the Constitution and the Peace Accords.  In fact, the human rights institute of the Jesuit university, UCA, entitled their article in El Salvador Proceso, the university's weekly, "The Nazional Defense Law". 

The FMLN strongly rejected the law as it violates the Peace Accords and the democratic advances attained by the accords.  Manuel Melgar, Adjunct Coordinator of the FMLN's legislative fraction, shortly before the law was passed, declared, “This law should not be passed because various parts of its contents violate the Constitution.”[1]  The Legislative Deputy labeled the law “fateful” because “it concentrates all national defense information in the hands of the Armed Forces”[2] The reduction of the Armed Forces and the separation of responsibilities being some of the important gains of the Peace Accords.  Furthermore, the FMLN criticized Article 25 of the law, which establishes that any individual is obligated to give any information they know to the authorities if it relates to national defense.  The law does not establish any limits as to how the National Defense System can obtain information leaving the legal door open to use repressive measures.  Salvador Sánchez Cerén, FMLN Party Coordinator and Legislative Deputy, summed up, “they are giving the Armed Forces the faculty to return to its repressive past.”[3]  The FMLN has sent a letter to the United Nations declaring the law a violation of democracy and the Peace Accords. 

The Human Rights Institute of the University of Central America (IDHUCA) in their article entitled “The Nazional Defense Law” analyzed sections of the law, making evident its dangerous nature.  The law talks about “preserving national interests against internal or external threats against National Security.” (Unofficial translation)  The threats against “National Security” are so broadly and vaguely defined that the law could be invoked against almost any action of opposition.  The law gives the definition of “National Security” as “The joint permanent actions that the State uses to create the conditions that resolve situations of international conflict, disturbances of public peace, natural disasters, and those vulnerabilities that place in jeopardy the achievement of the national objectives.”[4]

IDHUCA points out that in order to defend the nation, the law talks of “Defeating the obstacles that oppose the achievement of the national objectives and impeding that they achieve objectives that make the Salvadoran State vulnerable.”  However, the law does not establish who defines the national objectives or who interprets the objectives.  Thus, as the IDHUCA article points out, it is certainly possible that  “someone who criticizes a repressive action carried out by the PNC against a group that demands decent housing in the street be considered an internal threat in the framework of that concept of national security” and that critical voice should be “defeated” because they “oppose national objectives”. 

The lack of clarity of, and the way in which the phrase “national objectives” is used reminds one of the way the US government used the phrase “national interests” (now the key phrase is “fighting terrorism”) as an endless justification to carry out  military interventions around the globe, only the Salvadoran government would set its sights in the domestic realm.   

The Right-wing Salvadoran Association of Radio Broadcasters (ASDER) criticized Art. 25 of the law for violating freedom of expression, however, it was apparent the association was only defending their particular interests as they did not raise any other criticisms of the other grave violations contained in the law.  ASDER representatives - Antonio Elías Saca (President of ANEP), Alfedo Castillo, José Luis Saca (President of ASDER), and Pedro Moreno – held a press conference and stated, “We are not in agreement with the article (25) because it violates the rights to freedom of expression, its unconstitutional and furthermore, it violates international agreements and treaties.”[5]

The Association of Journalists of El Salvador (APES) also criticized Article 25 stating that it violates the freedom to exercising of journalism. 

The law is one of the recent actions of the increasingly authoritarian government of Flores in a series of actions pertaining to a strategy to eliminate the democratic legal framework gained by the Peace Accords and replace it with a legal framework that facilitates the governments protection of their unpopular and oppressive economic policy.  In addition, as we have been saying for some time, this ongoing strategy has and intends to weaken democratic institutions and/or convert them into institutions similar to the repressive institutions of the past. 

One of the worrisome examples of this strategy is the fusion of the PNC and the Armed Forces.  During the “auto-purging” of the police force, the strategic higher-up positions have been given to officials that belonged to the Armed Forces and the paramilitary “security” bodies.[6]  It is also worthy to point out that the new Defense Law fuses the intelligence gathering faculties of the military and the civilian police.  These developments have not come from nowhere, they are the product of years of preparation:  the government has carried out a clever PR campaign sending the military to aid in the emergency caused by the tropical storm Mitch in 1999/2000; the military has been involved in the reconstruction after the earthquakes of 2001/2002; the military patrols with the police due to the crime emergency; and the press is there to give a pretty face to it all.  One of the results has been that the public is used to seeing the military take part in almost any and every activity and it is “normal” to see them carrying out duties which should pertain to the civilian police. 

This law, a virtual endless green light to return to the past for the military, comes also at a time of significant social tension between workers and those who set the policies of the country: large private enterprise, embodied in ANEP.  The CIS has been informing our readers of the “national objectives” set out by ANEP (many of the priorities having to do with privatization of social services), the reprisals against those who oppose them, particularly the health care workers’ union (STISSS) and the electrical sector workers’ union (STSEL), and the importance of this particular conjuncture in time. 

El Salvador Proceso sums up, “…we return to the ‘old’ forms of government, those in which the army was present in each and everyone of the Executive decisions.  This seems to be the intention anticipated with disinformation, fear and social control through any means.”[7]  Keeping silent in the face of violating constitutional rights and democratic law will amounts to accepting to go back.  A return to the past or struggle in the present for a better future depends on the people.

Back to top

II. COMMUNITIES BLOCK CONSTRUCTION OF BELTWAY FOR 24 DAYS

On August 8, communities of Ciudad Delgado and Soyapango started a continuous 24-day protest of the Plan Puebla Panama beltway project around San Salvador.  The protesting communities are communities directly affected by the mega construction project, the members of which are to lose their homes.  The community members "camped out” on municipal land blocking the construction of the project.  The FMLN mayors of both Ciudad Delgado and Soyapango supported the actions and also contributed to their constituents' campaign in various manners.

The beltway around San Salvador is a Plan Puebla Panama project financed by the Inter-American Development Bank.  The beltway is to be constructed in order to facilitate international trade to the extent that industries such as the maquila will be able to transport their goods, the majority of which are neither produced in El Salvador nor consumed in El Salvador, more quickly and in a more profitable way.  The mega project is born of an expansionist and unsustainable vision of development.  For example, the beltway is being built without having any national transport plan or policy.  Therefore the project will contribute to increasing the rapid, un-orderly, and unsustainable growth of the metropolitan area and subsequently undermine the possibility of a national environmental ordering and development plan.  The project promotes the speculation of urban land, benefiting the banks and large construction companies. The beltway will also destroy many aquiferous zones and springs that provide potable water for San Salvador - the country already having severe shortages of water.  In addition, the beltway will be built on elevated areas of the Cordillera del Bálsamo, San Jacinto Hill, and the San Salvador Volcano drastically increasing their vulnerability to seismic activity, thereby placing the lives of tens of thousands of families in increased danger.  The plan violates municipal sovereignty and violates the land ordering law of the city of San Salvador, a municipal initiative.  Finally, the project has an initial cost of 800 million dollars, which could double by the time the project is completed.  The Salvadoran public will once again foot the bill without reaping the benefits.  This money is being spent to benefit the national and international elite while the country is suffering from dangerous levels of unemployment, hunger, epidemics, housing shortages from both before and after the earthquakes, the coffee crises, etc.[8]  It would be much more human to use the money to alleviate the suffering caused by one of the above-mentioned problems and would also be much more economically sound in the long run. 

For these reasons and threat of losing their homes, the communities set up the camp to block the construction even while being under the threat of the riot police.  The communities set up tents, slept at the site, cooked, made coffee, and even organized activities in order to carry out the long campaign.  The precarious situation of the protestors is emblematic of life in El Salvador.  Raúl Córdova, resident of Colonia Buena Vista, tells that he can no longer sleep at night and he is constantly contemplating how he has sacrificed his whole life just to have a roof over his head and now it is all threatened.  "My daughter tells me, 'Daddy go to sleep please', but I have felt so agitated, really bothered to see my sacrifice coming down in front of my eyes."  He is now 62 and no employer in El Salvador will give him work.[9] The protest action for many is the result of having no other options.

The actions and words of the protestors are also emblematic of the determination and sacrifice of the many Salvadorans committed to justice.  On day 9 of the action, protestors decided to chain themselves to trees.   “We are willing to protect nature with our lives,” stated César Ovidio of Ciudad Delgado.[10]

The FMLN municipal governments of Ciudad Delgado and Soyapango supported the communities' initiative with a firm "no" to the project.  "With this project they are digging our graves but we will not be intimidated,” declared Marta Elena de Rodríguez, Mayor of Soyapango.[11]  The mayors took out a full paid ad in the dailies repudiating and publicly denouncing the beltway project.  In the same declaration, the mayors denounced ASTALDI, the construction company carrying out this particular leg of the project, for illegally being on municipal land and demanded that the company abandon municipal grounds.  The mayors also passed a municipal decree prohibiting the entrance of any property of ASTALDI.   The mayors placed a demand in the Supreme Court stating that the project violates the requirements established in the Constitution, the Municipal Codes, and the environmental and ordering laws of each municipality.  The mayors have also formally brought their case to the Legislative Assembly. 

Members of the Salvadoran social movement and other municipalities have rallied to form part of the movement against the beltway project.  UNES, a Salvadoran environmental organization, has launched a project to give the Inter-American Development Bank 100,000 signatures against the project.  The municipality of Nejapa blocked the path of the project for over five hours and René Canjura, Mayor of Nejapa, filed a law suit in the District Attorney’s Office against the construction company for not having municipal authority for the project and for damaging a forest reserve.  In addition, the FMLN municipalities forming part of the San Salvador Metro Area, including Santa Tecla, San Salvador proper, Mejicanos, etc., all took a unified stand against the project for violating municipal authority and destroying lands declared as reserves by the municipal governments. 

Back to top

III. ASSEMBLY APPROVES REFORMS TO BANK LAW

On Thursday, August 21, ARENA and PCN, with help from the PDC and the CDU, passed a series of reforms to the national Bank Law.  The FMLN voted against the reforms qualifying them as a national “danger” and a clear attempt to assure the interests of the banks while placing the common customer’s savings in danger.

One of the reforms included in the new law defines the closing mechanism used when a bank goes under.  The reform establishes that the recoverable credits are passed to functioning banks but the unrecoverable debt is passed to the State, which is then paid by the people in the form of taxes. 

Another of the reforms deals with the amount of time in which the banks must get rid of their assets that they have laid an embargo upon.  The new reform extends the time allotted to the bank to get rid these properties from 2 years to 4 years.  Roberto Lorenzano, FMLN Deputy on the Economic Commission of the Legislative Assembly, stated that by giving more time "the properties are going to usufruct, affecting other aspects of the real economy not related to field of operation (of banks).”[12]

Perhaps the most dangerous reform is the reform that permits Salvadoran banks to invest 150% of their patrimony in the exterior, the prior law only permitted 100%.  In other words, "by authorizing the 150% not only does their own capital go, but also the savings of us all..."[13] Deputy Celina Monterrosa goes on to say, "What we (the FMLN) visualize here is capital flight facing the possible bankruptcy of the country, just as happened in Argentina."[14]

The opposition has repeatedly stated that the current government policies are very similar to those followed by Argentina and which led them to their crises. As they take what they can from the country, the elite appears to be preparing for a possible "Argentine" crisis in case the sacred family remittances are diminished given the economic downslide in the US.  They also could be preparing in case a government besides their own enters into power.  Nonetheless, the reforms are the work of their own strategy and will continue to deepen the economic crises (local investment not extracting is needed) at the cost of the consumer. 

Back to top

IV. SUPREME ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL RESPONDS TO DECEPTIVE REFORM IN THE ELECTORAL CODE

During the month of August, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) was fine-tuning the last details on a packet of laws they are about to send to the Legislative Assembly.  The packet consists of four different laws: 1) General Law of Political Parties; 2) Law of the TSE; 3) Electoral Procedures Law; and 4) Electoral Law. 

The General Law of Political Parties includes the following proposals:

·                 Establishing mechanism to elect candidates for public offices within parties

·                 Regulate and audit the funds received by political parties from the State

·                 Regulate and audit funds received by political parties from the exterior and third persons.

The Law of the TSE includes the following proposals:

·                 Look to create a professional system to administer the personnel assigned to the TSE

·                 Adjust the structure and functioning of the TSE to the implementation of the DUI

·                 Establish limits to employees and functionaries of collegial entities regarding activities of electoral nature. 

The following are aspects included in the Electoral Procedures Law, proposed by the TSE:

·                 Regulate elections

·                 Establish the frequency of elections for those functionaries elected by popular elections

The following are aspects of the Electoral Law to be presented by the TSE:

·                 Develop the constitutional principle of equality of vote

·                 Establish proportional representation in the assigning of Legislative deputies, as conceived in the Constitution of El Salvador

·                 Use the Salvadoran population as the base of the electoral system

·                 Recognize all of the political rights of the citizens, which in the current legislation are not taken into consideration in their totality[15]

These proposals, particularly those in the Electoral Law, are in response to the legislation passed by the Assembly in May anticipating the Supreme Courts ruling that prior legislation did not establish equality of vote and proportional representation regarding the distribution of Legislative Deputies.  The legislation passed in May by the Right-wing parties did not in fact correct the illegalities and many TSE magistrates do not agree with the legislation.  The legislation violates the principal of equality of vote by creating a system where in some cases a deputy only needs 3,000 votes to be elected while others need over 30,000.  In addition the legilation gives smaller parties such as the PCN unproportional weight with very few votes.  (For more information regarding this case and the interests behind the legislation see CIS bulletin, May 2002).   TSE Magistrate, Julio Hernández, explained, “ What they did (the deputies) was the worst thing they could have done.”  Magistrate Cerna also stated that the electoral law passed by the deputies “does not abide by the principal of equality of vote.”[16]  Hernández went on to say that “distinct alternatives from the one passed by the Assembly will be presented” (in the new text of the Electoral Code about to be presented).[17]

Back to top