Image Courtesy Getty Images

By Elise Zimmerman

With well over half the ballots counted, President Rafael Correa of Ecuador declared his third presidential campaign a victory early last week. Correa, who has been in power since 2006, will now likely be the country’s longest-serving president to date. With a reported 57% of the votes going to the incumbent, it appears that the vast majority of Ecuadorians are pleased with their leader.

Several factors have been attributed to Correa’s success in the public eye. Criticized by some, his nationalist policies have kept extra profits from skyrocketing petroleum prices within the country, providing additional money for public spending. Under Correa, Ecuadorians have seen improvements in schools and hospitals, a minimum wage that has grown past rates of inflation, and social policies meant to assist the poorest citizens economically.

While these successes during, as Correa describes it, the “citizens’ revolution” provided some sense of security going into the campaign, the president attempted to up his chances of reelection by playing both sides of the media. According to the Washington Post, the Ecuadorian government owns “five television channels…four radio stations, two newspapers and four magazines.” These, as well as a law giving him the right to airtime whenever he chooses, were used to blast pro-Correa propaganda all campaign long. Meanwhile, Correa spoke out against private media outlets throughout his bid for office, going so far as to close eleven radio stations whose coverage he disagreed with. With supporters distrustful of private media opinions, Correa’s other campaign tactics went largely unchecked and included aggressive statements about the policies of his opponents.

Poor strategy on the part of these opponents also assisted Correa in his victory. The seven other candidates in the election split the remaining votes among themselves, giving the next runner-up in the election a significantly weaker 22%. In speeches, many challengers chose to discuss the failures of Correa’s economic policies, which are generally well liked by Ecuadorian citizens. It wasn’t until the weeks leading up to the campaign that the more negative aspects of Correa’s presidency were addressed. When they did address the issues of high crime rates, Correa’s intolerance of criticism and other abuses of power, his opponents failed to make compelling arguments, likely due to Correa’s tendency to attack political critiques with personal insults.

Despite his questionable methods, Correa also secured power for his Alianza País (AP) party in this election. By manipulating voting districts and changing the way assembly seats are distributed, Correa’s party now holds 70% of the seats in congress. The combination of the AP’s legislative super majority and Correa’s near-absolute authority as President are drawing many comparisons to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. While illness has forced Chavez to relinquish his role as the symbol of left-wing Latin American politics, it appears Correa is here to fill that void.

Image Courtesy http://www.latinamericanstudies.org

By Elise Zimmerman

The non-profit organization Human Rights Watch released its annual World Report Thursday, which details the most pressing Human Rights topics for each country around the world. As a region, Latin America’s record is far from clean. While some nations appear to be protecting their citizens’ rights better than others, each of the six discussed below was recognized for a unique set of abuses and triumphs. For more information on each country, and more complete data, you can download a PDF of the Report here.

In Brazil, a country noted for its influence throughout the region, the report describes a complex system of cause and effect based around its high rates of violence and gang activity. Police violence was recognized as a principal human rights violation, as there were 214 “police killings” reported in Rio de Janeiro state in the first half of 2012. One possible explanation for this high crime rate is the country’s attempt to reduce crime and increase police presence. According to the report, state governments often set “crime reduction targets,” which may lead to excessive police activity. The report also calls into question the level of accountability police officers are held to with regards to cases of brutality. In the past, some have called for the creation of special teams of prosecutors for such cases, but no teams have yet been created.

The report spoke favorably about Brazil’s May 2012 court ruling to allow civil unions between two people regardless of gender. These civil unions are granted equal rights to civil marriages. However, this civil code attracted much negative press in August of last year, when it was used as justification for a civil union consisting of three people in São Paulo.

Chile is recognized in the report for its progress in handling the countless crimes committed between 1973 and 1999 under the oppressive Pinochet Regime. According to Human Rights Watch, ¾ of the documented killings and disappearances during this time have entered the legal system and “more than 800 former state security agents have been indicted or convicted.” Of these, the report states that 64 are currently serving sentences. Despite these successes, many of the sentences given to these criminals have been commuted or reduced “in recognition of the time elapsed since the criminal act.” This begs the ever-present question of accountability- while Chile’s government is clearly doing a good job of recognizing and approaching the crimes committed in its past, is it doing enough to punish those responsible?

In Colombia, many of the human rights violations described in the report have to do with the internal conflicts resulting from FARC and ELN rebel groups. These groups are responsible for thousands of deaths, threats, the internal displacement of more than 4 million people, and the use of child soldiers. In June, the Legal Framework for Peace amendment, which regulates the “administration of justice” for peace agreements with guerrilla groups, and allows Congress to give impunity to lesser players in large-scale crimes, focusing punishment on the “most responsible” people.

Additionally, the report finds that human rights defenders in Colombia are frequently threatened or attacked, and the perpetrators are rarely brought to justice.

Cuba is well known in the field of human rights for being oppressive. Political dissent is almost completely disallowed, and this policy is enforced through “short-term detentions, beatings, public acts of repudiation, travel restrictions, and forced exile.” According to the report, the government does not allow independent or international groups to evaluate its prisons, so the true extent of these punishments is not known. However, several prisoners representing the Group of 75 were released after a hunger strike killed one of its members, Orlando Zapata Tamayo in 2010.

The report also describes the common practice of arbitrary detention, which the Cuban government reportedly uses as a preemptive strategy to prevent its citizens from engaging in activities such as protests, marches, and meetings to discuss politics.

Many of the rights violations in Guatemala revolve around the effects of the country’s 36-year civil war.  According to the report, roughly 98% of crimes do not see trial. This figure could be slightly less in the future, however, as the country’s Attorney General Claudia Paz y Paz has been recognized for her work in pushing through many cases involving “torture, extrajudicial killings, and corruption” dating back to the civil war. In March, Pedro Pimental, a major player in the Dos Erres Massacre was sentenced to 6,060 years in prison for his role, and at least four others were also given time behind bars. Despite this progress, President Otto Pérez Molina has been quoted as saying crimes committed during the civil war “do not constitute genocide.” Perhaps it is this attitude coming from so high up in the government that is preventing more advances in justice.

Also in the report is a discussion of President Pérez Molina’s use of the Guatemalan military in public affairs. The president hash been known to declare many States of Emergency, which allow for the suspension of basic rights, and in October, eight people were killed when the military police were called to quell a protest blocking a highway in the northwestern state of Totonicapán. While the president has promised reforms to the overuse of the military in the past, no progress has yet been made.

Latin America is a complicated place. As the region continues to recover from years of civil wars, military dictatorships and economic instability, it is just as important to keep in mind the many triumphs that have come from these nations as it is to acknowledge the abuses occurring in them. Despite the rights violations described in this article and in the full report, Latin America truly is a region on the rise. Every region has its faults, and it should be said that Latin America is working to correct its own.

By Elise Zimmerman

This coming Saturday, December 1, is World AIDS Day! While the world applauds the achievements that have already been made in the fight against HIV and AIDS and reflects on the work still to be done, I saw it fit to bring attention to Brazil’s successful efforts in combating the effects of the virus. Since the country’s first case of AIDS was recorded in 1982, the new republic has implemented several programs that, although controversial, have significantly reduced the prevalence of HIV and AIDS in Brazilian society.

The Brazilian approach to preventing the spread of HIV and AIDS owes much of its success to its multifaceted nature. Because the transition from military dictatorship to democracy occurred around the same time as the emergence of pandemic HIV in the country, provisions were made at the basic level to provide for those affected by the virus. Government agencies and non-governmental organizations have worked together to implement awareness campaigns, provide free medication to all citizens living with the disease, and address transmission in high-risk populations.

Possibly the most notable aspect of the Brazilian model is the government’s distribution of antiretroviral medications to all citizens with HIV and AIDS. In order to provide these medications to the approximately 600,000 people living with the virus, the Brazilian government broke several international patent laws and began manufacturing generic versions of the drugs within its borders. This decision drew criticism from many developed nations, including the United States, who at one point suggested that the World Trade Organization discipline the Brazilian federal government. The same decision was met with praise by activist organizations such as the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

Another contentious facet of Brazil’s anti-AIDS campaign is its use of sex workers to distribute information about safe sex techniques and condom usage to high-risk populations. Most notably, the “Maria Without Shame” campaign aimed to increase the self-esteem of prostitutes in order to encourage them to take control of their health by using condoms with their clients. This program was shown to be successful in increasing condom use among sex workers, although the stigma associated with condoms continues to be a barrier to complete success.

The usage of prostitutes in AIDS awareness campaigns has landed Brazil in trouble with some of its donors in the past. In 2005, the Brazilian government refused to sign a document condemning prostitution, effectively turning down $40 million in assistance funding from the US government. This decision, referred to by many as an “act of defiance,” signifies Brazil’s growing independence from more developed nations. As its economy continues to grow, Brazil’s global influence increases as well.

While unconventional by US standards, the Brazilian model for combating HIV and AIDS has shown very positive results. A now famous World Bank prediction from the 1990s forecasted 1.2 million Brazilians living with AIDS by the year 2000. Today, the estimate is around 600,000. As its influence swells, I can only hope that the Brazilian government will begin to assist other nations (in Latin America and elsewhere) in implementing similarly successful programs.

Image from Getty Images

By Elise Zimmerman

Lawmakers in Argentina voted in favor of lowering the voting age in the country from 18 to 16 last Wednesday.  The measure received strong support from both the Senate and the House, passing with a final House vote of 131 to two. Supporters within the government claim that the change will “[expand] the frontier of rights” to the nation’s youth. However, opponents of the revision contend that its main goal is to secure more support for President Fernandez’s party ahead of the 2013-midterm elections.

Since her election to the presidency in 2007, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner has sought the support of Argentina’s youth.  Upon her election, Fernandez appointed members of the La Cámpora political youth group to high positions within her administration. Later in her presidency, Fernandez used funds from Argentina’s social security agency for a program giving free computers to students. These and other pro-youth policies have earned her a strong backing by young Argentines. By allowing this demographic to vote in the next election, the Fernandez administration hopes to maintain its majority in both legislative bodies.

It is thought that giving 16- and 17-year-olds the option to vote, instead of making it mandatory as it is for Argentines 18 and older, will prompt only young supporters of Fernandez to cast ballots. These votes could be used to patch a hole created by those unhappy with Fernandez’s management of the economy. Recent polls revealing a dip in support for Fernandez have been related to a general slowing of Argentina’s economy.

Assuming this new measure is meant to guarantee votes for the next election, a lot is at stake for the Fernandez administration. Voters will choose politicians to occupy one half of the seats in the Chamber of Deputies and one third of those in the Senate. Establishing a strong foundation in the legislator could matter even more two years later, if President Fernandez decides to seek election to her third term. While not yet legal in Argentina, there has been talk of a possible change to the country’s constitution that would allow leaders to be elected more than twice. While Fernandez has neither confirmed nor denied this possibility, maintaining power in the legislature will also determine the efficiency of her party for the remaining two years of her current term.

By passing this measure, Argentina joins a very small number of countries that allow citizens under 18 to vote in elections. In reality, the 2% of the population affected by this change is unlikely to sway future elections in either direction, although the added backing for Fernandez’s Front for Victory party is surely a motive. In my opinion, allowing young people to participate in national politics is a good thing. The ability to affect national politics is a strong motivator for engagement in social issues, and an engaged youth is a productive one.

By Elise Zimmerman

Election season in Brazil ended Sunday with run-off voting for municipal positions across the country. Earlier this month, results from the nation’s municipal elections were inconclusive in many cities, leading to run-off elections between the candidates with the most votes initially.   

In many parts of the country, the ruling Workers Party (PT) came out ahead, pleasing current and former Presidents Dilma Rousseff and Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. A major victory for the PT is the election of Fernando Haddad as mayor of São Paulo. Haddad beat Jose Serra of the Social Democratic Party (PSDB) by a margin of 56%-44%. His election in Brazil’s largest and wealthiest city, combined with a clear base of support from voters throughout the rest of the nation, puts the PT in a strong position nationally.

However, while overall numbers favored the incumbent party, run-offs in several prominent capitals in the Northeast elected officials from opposing parties.

These elections have been regarded as highly important, as their results determine the major political players in both the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympic games. Additionally, the success of the PT in these elections was set to be an indicator for the 2014 Presidential elections, in which Dilma will run for a second term.

While these elections have far-reaching impacts for Brazil’s development as a nation, they also highlight some of the internal problems the political system faces as its 27-year-old democracy matures. Although voting is compulsory in Brazil, approximately 15% did not participate in this month’s elections. In addition to this figure, thousands of ballots were deemed “null and blank protest votes.” Although Brazil has approximately 30 political parties, many of its citizens do not feel adequately represented by their government. 

As Brazil grows to become a world power, the strength of its government will play a critical role in assuring success. Recent court verdicts on the mensalão corruption case, in which prominent figures from Lula’s government were pronounced guilty of money laundering, bribery, and other crimes, sponsored a sense of optimism among Brazilians. This ruling was seen as a major step for modern Brazilian courts, as the country is known to be flagrantly tolerant of executive corruption.

With municipal control set for the next two years, new and incumbent leaders have many significant tasks ahead of them. While major progress has already been made, Brazil’s path toward global relevance is still long. Tackling internal issues such as corruption and legislative representation should be the logical first step, as the development of strong democratic principles will encourage Brazil’s development as a nation.

Image by Associated Press

By Elise Zimmerman

Earlier this month, eight indigenous protesters were killed, and 34 injured, by military forces in Totonicapán, Guatemala. The military officers, on patrol with local police, fired upon the protestors for obstructing the Pan-American Highway in a peaceful protest of proposed constitutional changes. Initially, Guatemalan President Otto Perez Molina denied military involvement on the basis that, supposedly, the soldiers were armed only with teargas. This denial was publicly rescinded nearly a week later, however, when Perez Molina confirmed the soldiers’ use of firearms.

In the wake of these events, several international human rights organizations have sent representatives to Totonicapán to evaluate the situation. Many of these organizations have been monitoring Guatemala as a whole closely since President Perez Molina’s inauguration in January, as his “Mano Dura” anti-violence policy appears to be resulting in increased military presence throughout the country.

Perez Molina’s Mano Dura, or Iron Fist, policy is based on the idea that the national police have failed to stop the widespread violence in Guatemala. As a result, Mano Dura favors the increased use of military forces, including the Kaibiles special forces, for domestic purposes. Francisco Dall’Anese, who oversees a UN commission for investigating Guatemalan corruption, has criticized the policy, stating, “The army should take care of security of the country against attacks from a foreign power and never for citizen security.”

In Totonicapán, pressure from international groups and domestic outcry lead to a large-scale investigation of the killings, and the eventual arrest of eight military officers believed to have fired the fatal shots. President Perez Molina took further action on October 10, announcing that troops will no longer be used in cases of protest in Guatemala. This is a major step for the Guatemalan government, which has struggled with the treatment of protestors since the end of its 40+ year civil war. In fact, the arrested soldiers are the first to be charged in relation to the treatment of protestors since the end of the war.

While this conflict appears to be ending on a progressive note, long-term adherence to these new policies will be the true test of the Perez Molina administration. The international community must keep a close eye on the development of this new Guatemalan government, as it is still very much recovering from the conflicts of recent years. In this case, the wave of media and political pressures was a driving force in the President’s corrective policies, which are notably different than those based on the Mano Dura stance. Future human rights abuses in Guatemala should be monitored and reacted to similarly to continue to shine light on its government’s policies. President Perez Molina’s response to the international attention demonstrates some receptiveness to foreign opinions that could play a major role in future government decisions.