The Re-(re-)elections of Alberto Fujimori and Evo Morales by David Powell

The election of Alberto Fujimori to the presidency of Peru in 1990 marked the first time the Peruvian people had elected a president who was not a member of the traditional ruling class; that is to say, although he was male, he was not a white middle/upper-class member of the elite. Not only did Fujimori’s social class separate him from the normal power base of Peruvian politics, but the fact that he did not belong to one of the traditional political parties separated him further from the historical power base of Peruvian politics.This very virtue of offering the Peruvian people something different to their previous leaders was a crucial factor in enabling Fujimori to defeat the world famous novelist Mario Vargas Llosa in the 1990 election, as, to the Peruvian people, Fujimori represented a break from the failures of previous politicians.

daves blog 1

Following an eventful first couple of years in power, a new constitution was enacted on 31st December 1993, following a referendum in October that year. One of the ways in which the new constitution differed from the old one was that it allowed for the re-election of the president (prior to this, the president of Peru had to stand down at the end of each term).  Fujimori took advantage of the amended constitution to secure re-election in 1995, without too much controversy. What did cause consternation, however, was his decision to run for the presidency once again in 2000. Although victory would, in practice, lead to his second re-election (prohibited by both the new and old constitutions), Fujimori argued that this would be legal, as, in fact, it would only constitute his first re-election since the 1993 constitution came into effect. Having been permitted by Peruvian electoral bodies to run for the presidency again, Fujimori subsequently won the 2000 election, and on the 28th July that year he began his third consecutive term in office.

daves blog 2

Evo Morales was elected president of Bolivia in 2005, and took office in early 2006, under a constitution that did not allow for re-election. A new constitution was ratified by a referendum in January 2009, and this new constitution permitted the president to have one re-election.  Morales was duly re-elected in December 2009. Recently, with his 7-year term due to end and the president still proving popular with the electorate (although not as popular as at the time of his 2009 re-election), he has announced his decision to stand for re-election in the 2014 general election, stating that were he to win the election, then this would constitute his first re-election under the terms of the new constitution, and would therefore be legal. This has since been ratified by Bolivia’s Constitutional Court, thus paving the way for Morales to attempt to gain a third successive term in 2014’s general election.

The parallels between Fujimori and Morales are striking. Not only have both represented to their respective electorates a break from traditional politics, coming from social groups outside of those from which the political class is usually drawn, but both have also amended their countries’ constitution to allow for re-election. Subsequently they have been re-elected and then used identical arguments to enable themselves to stand for a further re-election.  What remains to be seen is whether their trajectories will be similar. After (narrowly) winning the Peruvian presidency again in 2000, in an election that was widely criticized as fraudulent, Fujimori was forced from office in November 2000 following a corruption scandal, a mere few months after winning the election. This prolonging of his spell in power, along with claims of authoritarianism, corruption, and human rights abuses, have somewhat overshadowed the notable achievements the Fujimori administration made in improving the economy and in the fight against terrorism. Should he succeed in being re-elected next year, Evo Morales will surely wish to end his presidency with a better legacy than that of Fujimori, who currently finds himself imprisoned in Peru. Given the fact that the Peruvian’s third term was that which brought about his downfall, Morales might consider himself to be better off quitting while he is ahead.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in David Powell and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The Re-(re-)elections of Alberto Fujimori and Evo Morales by David Powell

  1. Rich Paige says:

    this is idiotic. fujimori was a dictator and actually suspended democracy while it served him. morales has been elected fairly by the people. other than reelection, I fail to see how these two are similar

  2. David Powell says:

    The point of this blog was to compare the re-elections of Morales and Fujimori, and highlight the similarities between the two. I only touched on the dictatorial nature of Fujimori’s regime, and I certainly did not level any accusations of authoritarianism at Morales. Morales and Fujimori are similar in various ways, two of which I highlighted in my blog: they both broke the mould as leaders of their countries, coming as they did from outside the traditional political elite, and they were both similar in their attempts to secure re-election. In addition to this, they were (are) extremely popular. As you point out, Morales was fairly elected by the people, and so, (at least) twice, authoritarian or not, was Fujimori.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Evo Morales is Albert Fujimori’s slightly more tamer distant cousin (Morales is Native American and Fujimori is Asian. Native American evolved of Asians coming across the Bering land bridge into the Americas and still share the same black hair genetics to this day. Evo Morales no as nasty as fujimori cause Fukimori would would in with machines guns shoot any protester dead and wanted to Genocide the Native Americans though Sterilization. While Evo had conflict with his own race (TIPNIS protester) at least he did not go all trigger happy or order them all Sterilized.

  4. David Powell says:

    The point you make about Fujimori’s ethnicity is interesting, as the argument that the Incas are of Japanese origin is one that has been used as a (spurious) defence of Fujimori in the debate over his nationality, and whether he was actually born in Japan (which would have rendered him ineligible to run for the presidency of Peru). As for the human rights abuses committed under the Fujimori regime, while I believe you exaggerate the offences committed during his presidency, and Morales certainly comes out more favourably in a comparison of the two leaders in this respect, as I mentioned in my previous comment, the main idea behind my original post was merely to highlight the similarities between Fujimori and Morales as regards their attempts to secure re-election.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s