Please, send us your comments and suggestions
Center for Information, Documentation and Research Support (CIDAI)
E-mail: cidai@cidai.uca.edu.sv
Universidad Centroamericana (UCA)
Apdo. Postal 01-168 Boulevard Los Próceres
San Salvador, El Salvador, Centro América
Tel: +(503) 210-6600 ext. 407
Fax: +(503) 210-6655
Proceso is published weekly in Spanish by the Center for Information, Documentation and Research Support (CIDAI) of the Central American University (UCA) of El Salvador. Portions are sent in English to the *reg.elsalvador* conference of PeaceNet in the USA and may be forwarded or copied to other networks and electronic mailing lists. Please make sure to mention Proceso when quoting from this publication.
Subscriptions to Proceso in Spanish can be obtained by sending a check for US$50.00 (Americas) or $75.00 (Europe) made out to 'Universidad Centroamericana' and sent to the above address. Or read it partially on the UCA’s Web Page: http://www.uca.edu.sv
For the ones who are interested in sending donations, these would be welcome at Proceso. Apdo. Postal 01-168, San Salvador, El Salvador.
Proceso 1159
August 10 2005
ISSN 0259-9864
Editorial: License to plunder the State
Politics: The increasing prices of petroleum demand a consensus
Economy: The right wing’s media against Schafick Handal
License to plunder the State
The Banco Agricola, the Banco Cuscatlan, and the Banco
Salvadoreño asked the president of the Supreme Court of Justice to “state” if he
thought they could provide the Section of Probity, a branch of the institution,
or not with information about the financial operations of three of the most
important public officials of the last ARENA administration. The banks said that
they did not find any law that might give to that branch the faculty to request
such information, or any laws that could make them give it away. This is a
surprise because there are dispositions in the Constitution and in the laws
about getting wealthy in an illicit manner. In addition, the law entitles the
Section of Probity to closely watch how wealthy the officials get.
The Supreme Court of Justice decided that only its magistrates have the faculty
to check on the probity of the former officials. Therefore it is their duty,
through their president, to request information to the banks. That is how they
got away with it.. Therefore, their request as well as the answer of the
president of the Supreme Court of Justice are unconstitutional. No law
contemplates the possibility to ask the president of the Court to “state his
perspective” about a legal matter. Therefore, the request of the banks is not
valid and the answer of the president of the Court has created a juridical
persona that did not exist until now, and with it he has invaded, in addition,
the duties of the legislator.
Paradoxically, the most important banks do not see the prevailing legal
dispositions, but they do see an absent juridical figure. They contradict
themselves. First, they state that the Supreme Court of Justice is not allowed
to request financial reports, and then they ask that their president “states his
criteria” about it. Even worse, the banks themselves suggest that their
magistrates should adopt this position, a request that was granted. The banks
did not only get away with it, but the president of the Supreme Court of Justice
granted them more than they were asking for, since he declared that the request
of the Section of Probity was not valid. Despite the fact that this is illegal,
according to what was agreed with the magistrates, he should have requested the
aforementioned reports himself.
The resolution of the Supreme Court of Justice is an improvised addition to a
conclusion that had already been reached. Its premises were false and they
included elements that have nothing to do with the present legislation, and this
is an absurd situation. In fact, arguments were added in a rush after the
session of the magistrates ended, that is, they did not know anything about it
and they did not discuss it. The president of the Court, when he notified the
banks about it, he did not even bother to hide the special treatment, contrary
to the elemental principles of right, that he gave to the former most important
officials from ARENA. He is not interested in knowing their financial statements
to verify their integrity as “an attention” to “the quality of their performance
and their high juridical responsibility”, given “the magnitude and the political
fineness of this matter, and to prevent that the individuals that were supposed
to declare would be exposed to the passions and to the circumstantial juridical
flaws, nor to the internal lack of prudence”. In other words, the enrichment of
the most important officials from ARENA will not be investigated. To do that
would be a political imprudence, and, therefore, to have intended to do
something like that, as the law indicates, is another sort of imprudence. The
Section of Probity would have gone too far to fulfill the law, maybe because of
a wrong sense of “passion” or just because of a human “shortcoming”. The
political criteria are much more important than the constitutional principles,
more important than the international engagements, and more important than the
respect to the juridical procedures.
So far, the banks of the system have always provided information to the Section
of Probity, and none of them had ever questioned its attributions. But when the
Section requested a report about three of the most important officials of the
last ARENA administration, among them, very probable indeed, the name of the
former president, the banks refused to give that information away and the
Supreme Court of Justice annulled such request.
In addition to these three officials, there are more than ten names in a waiting
list. That is how the banks protect these important clients, and these
magistrates, with some exceptions, feel obliged to them, since they put them in
their positions as magistrates, and they both know that there are enough reasons
to hide their financial operations away. Therefore, the performance of the
Supreme Court means just one thing: a way to undercover corruption. An action
that contradicts the allegedly transparent discourse of the ARENA
administration. When the administrative responsibilities are centralized –not to
make them more efficient and guarantee a better administration of justice-, the
magistrates are willing to improve the efficiency of their control to guarantee
certain privileges to the most important public officials and to the business
elite.
Paradoxically, the illicit enrichment Law of officials and public employees was
requested by the Supreme Court of Justice itself, and it also requested in order
to fight against corruption in an efficient manner, the Legislative Assembly
increased the number of duties of the Section of Probity. No one had ever made
any observations to this law.
Without an effective control over the patrimony of the public officials, it is
not possible to put an end to their illicit way to get wealthier at the expense
of the taxes paid by the citizenry. That is why the Court asked for the law and
its modification. And for the same reason, since 1999, over 200 reports of the
Section of Probity have been kept away in drawers. These reports have enough
information to suspect that the former officials that have been mentioned have
committed acts of corruption while fulfilling their duties. The apathy of the
Court has allowed that most of these crimes take place without a punishment. The
new disposition through which the magistrates undertake the request and the
reception of the financial reports, suppresses, by omission, a very effective
instrument to fight against corruption. In fact, the Court takes an scandalous
amount of time to resolve a case. The magistrates do not have time to
effectively resolve the cases, and this promotes impunity. However, they do have
time for all kinds of social events and trips. Their agenda is full of routines
and extremely important affairs that generally are never resolved, and to this
it can be added the control of the patrimony of the officials.
These actions of the Supreme Court of Justice are not unusual. It is how it
normally works. It shows the bad side of the power in this country and it also
illustrates the inefficiency of the law. There is a law and it establishes
efficient instruments to fight against corruption, but it is not used because
those involved in certain crimes are important former public officials from
ARENA. Therefore, the problem is not in the law, but in the fact that law is not
used by those that have the responsibility to administrate it, in order to
protect the powerful ones. It does not apply juridical criteria, but political
ones. ANDA is an exceptional case. It arrived to a court probably because of a
personal dispute or because of a political revenge, but not because of a
transparent action. Therefore, the court has allowed the officials and the
employees of the ARENA government to plunder the State.
The increasing prices of petroleum demand a consensus
The increasing prices of gasoline have created a general
alarm in the country. The wave of increasing prices does not seem to end.
Several business companies have intended to take advantage of this situation,
offering gasoline in their commercial promotions.
Others do rack their brains trying to offer a solution, for instance, to tell
people not to buy gasoline for a day from the transnational company with the
highest prices. With this measure of pressure, they would force the gas stations
to lower the prices. It could be, however, that this kind of proposals do
overlook the fact that the problem is connected with the international market,
and to certain interests that do not only have to do with the economy but with
politics as well. Supposing that the consumers were able to affect the actions
of the international petroleum companies, it could also happen that these
companies ed up choosing to leave the country. That is, in the best of the
cases. A country can live without Coca-cola or without Pizza Hut, but not
without resources of energy.
Under a more realistic perspective, what is clear is that the problem transcends
the merely economic dimensions and that it demands political solutions. It is
not realistic to expect that the petroleum crisis is resolved by itself –or by
the “invisible hand of the market”-, or that this problem can be resolved by a
war such as the one against Iraq. This is not only unethical but it is also
inefficient. A violent campaign and so many deaths have done nothing to make
Iraq more democratic, a war has done nothing to satisfy the unspeakable
objective of a military invasion. Therefore, the solution is to look for a
consensus. This article will present an approach to the people who should be
looking for those consensus and for those issues that should be discussed.
What should the agreements be about?
A departure point would be to indicate the aspects of the petroleum crisis that
demand a consensus. A diagnosis shared by many is that petroleum is becoming too
much of a luxurious item as to depend on it. This statement is completely
reasonable. But it also means that someone is getting ahead too quick. To decide
if a step should be taken towards new sources of energy is not a decision that
can be made right away. To adapt the vehicles, the machinery, and other items to
a new source of energy is a long and a complicated process. And this is without
even mentioning the expenses that this adaptation process would bring along.
There are many interests, of all kinds, that would be affected. It is not that
simple.
But while it is discussed if petroleum should remain as the ultimate source of
energy, it is also important to resolve the problem immediately. It is
impossible to keep dealing with the growing prices that know no bounds. The
population resents the effects of the growing prices of petroleum. This should
be important for the government. Even if the last opinion polls reveal a
favorable perception of the present administration, it is also true that this
opinion polls do place the economy as the heel of Achilles of this
administration. However, to resolve the problem of the increasing prices of
petroleum should not be an action aimed to win the elections, but an action for
the welfare of the country.
The private business companies are also alarmed about this issue. Its most
important circles, represented in the National Association of the Private
Business Companies (ANEP, in Spanish), consider that the expectations about the
economic growth have lost strength.
Therefore, one of the aspects that has to be examined is how to stop the growth
of the increasing prices of gasoline. A possibility is to control the prices.
The official party and the business circles refuse to implement these measures,
given the prevailing Neo-liberal conceptions, which dictate the virtual state of
grace of the private sector. However, as it happens in every search for a
consensus, it is necessary to have enough will to make concessions for
everyone’s sake.
Once a mechanism is established to improve the impact of the increasing prices
of gasoline, it is necessary to think in measures of a higher impact. The first
matter that has to be resolved is if it is desirable to keep petroleum and its
products as the most important source of energy. If the answer is affirmative,
how to obtain more favorable conditions to import combustible? Is it possible to
obtain these conditions? Who will the providers be, and under what conditions?
If, instead, the answer is negative, the entire country has to get ready for a
long tradition towards new sources of energy. Whatever the alternative might be,
the solutions that have been approached must be the result of a dialogue that
counts with the participation of the most diverse sectors.
The actors in consensus
It is necessary to define the levels that a consensus should be looking for. And
these are basically a couple of levels: one, inside the Salvadoran society, and
the other one at an international scale. Internally, to look for solutions to
the problems created by the increasing prices of combustible should include all
of the national sectors. It is important, without a doubt, the creation of a
commission formed by governmental actors and members of the private business
companies to deliberate on this issue; however, it is also important to include
the working class and the civilian organizations. If the decision making process
about this issue only includes the economically powerful groups and the
traditional political sectors, it is clear that there will not be a solution at
the height of the needs of a society.
It is also necessary to formulate long-term national objectives of development
connected with the present context, especially with those sceneries portrayed by
the world-wide energy crisis.
On the other hand, it is necessary to look for another kind of consensus: a
consensus that involves the international actors. When it comes to look for new
sources of energy or when it comes to negotiate an improved set of favorable
conditions to purchase petroleum in the world-wide market, it is necessary to
reach certain agreements. El Salvador has closed itself, mostly because of
ideological reasons and not for a realistic attitude, and it is not looking for
other offers in the petroleum market besides the United States.
El Salvador, on its own, is not strong enough to do business with other
countries that produce petroleum. It would have to look for partners in the
other countries of the area. However, the pathway towards consensus in the
Central American isthmus seems to be filled with thorns, as the CAFTA revealed.
Actually, the uncertainty caused by the increasing prices of gasoline is a
symptom of the absence of a national vision in the economic field. While the
population remains in the hands of “the free forces of the market”, crisis will
come and go. When will the common welfare become something more than meat for
the electoral events? When will it be conceived as the foundation for
development and for the political governance?
The right wing’s media against Schafick Handal
There was panic and indignation before the “imminent
departure” of Salvadoran troops to Venezuela connected with the congressman of
the FMLN Schafik Handal, in case of a possible invasion of the United States to
that country: those are the spontaneous reactions that can be expected from the
population, in case this one were to take seriously the “alarming news” of last
week, published in the newspapers, specifically in the morning papers. More than
news, the pages of those papers were filled with personal interpretations and
several assumptions –of Salvadoran public officials, including President Saca-
about some declarations made by Handal in Cuba. Later, as if it were not enough
with the craziness caused by the first “news”, there was another reason to be
terrified, and it was so “transcendental” that it appeared in the cover of El
Diario de Hoy on August 24th : “A request to investigate the FMLN for fire
arms”. It was explained that before the “Salvadoran troops” that were allegedly
“offered” by Handal, President Saca had requested to the Attorney General’s
Office and to the Legislative Assembly an investigation about the possible
existence of firearms hidden away by the FMLN.
As interesting as it might be to elaborate logical conclusions that come from
the news coverage, in order to demonstrate the unrealistic scene created through
the media in question, this is not the issue that this article is about to
discuss. This is all about a problem that keeps turning worse: the lack of
professionalism and ethical responsibility in the news, in the particular case
of the newspapers that were mentioned earlier in this article. The case of
Handal and his declarations in Cuba is a good example of a problem that, if it
is not resolved, can have serious repercussions over the democratization
process.
Really, what were the news?
Several elements turn a piece of information into news. Although there is not a
universal formula, it is possible to establish that –just like Raul Sohr
indicates in “History and Power of the Press”- information is what gathers some
of the following features, in an arbitrary order: the magnitude of the
phenomenon (how many people are affected by it), the proximity of the event (its
relation with the audience), an immediate coverage (how fast did the event get
to the papers), the spectacular sense of the news (how unusual the event is),
clarity (what cannot be understood is discarded), the periodical perspective (to
follow the development of certain subjects), the credibility of the information
and its source (what and who says it), the exclusiveness of the news (the
competition to be the first one to say it). In addition, the basic news
perspective is reduced to talking about the facts as they happened, in a way
that the reader is able to examine the events.
With this basic concept, it is necessary to rescue the events that recently took
place in Cuba, including the declarations given by Handal. A couple of important
incidents took place the weekend between the 20th and the 21st of August of this
year in the Caribbean island. El Salvador connected itself with those situations
in a direct manner.
On the 20th, it was about the graduation of the doctors from the Latin American
School of Medicine (ELAM). Out of the 1,610 young graduates, 119 were from El
Salvador. In addition, among the more than 20 presidents and important
representatives of Latin America and the Caribbean community that were invited
to the graduation there was Schafick Handal, a congressman of the Legislative
Assembly of El Salvador and a member of the Political Commission of the FMLN.
The second event was on the 21st, and it was about the broadcasting of the
Venezuelan program “Alo, Presidente” (Hello, Mr. President), from the Sandino
County in Pinar del Rio, to the west of Cuba.
The most important regional news during the broadcasting of the program was that
Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro revealed their decision to expand Mision Milagro
(Miracle Mission), the Cuban-Venezuelan cooperation program that intends to cure
blindness, this time committed with operations for 6 million of Latin American
people that do not have any resources to get an operation. In addition, many
issues were discussed in the television program, such as the Bolivar’s
Alternative for the Americas (ALBA) and Petrocaribe, among others. During a few
minutes Handal was on the show as a guest for being a historical leader inside
the FMLN. The congressman spoke about Farabundo Marti, saying –among other
things- how, through “an assembly of the Popular University”, it was decided to
defend Nicaragua, being chosen, among other peers, Farabundo Marti. Castro asked
what would the Salvadorans do if Venezuela were attacked by Imperialism. Handal
responded: “Without the need of an assembly in a university, hundreds of us
would have to go; and if it were possible, thousands of people should go to
fight for Venezuela if this country is attacked, the Salvadoran people is
trained, we fought in a long war, and Imperialism was not able to defeat us”.
After this statement, the space for the public opinion was perfectly opened to
criticize what had been said, to analyze and comment about it. However, that was
not what was done in El Salvador. What became “the news” in El Salvador were the
interpretations and the plotting of the Salvadoran officials. Logically, before
the declarations made by Handal, it was obvious to react. But those reactions
should have been connected with what Handal said, not handled as something that
would twist his statement.
Journalism for a democracy
In a country that intends to be democratic, the communication media play a key
role. The kind of “journalism” that is actually propaganda is completely
outdated. To exaggerate and to twist information to promote a political
objective beyond the simple publication of the events is a perverse thing to do.
The Uruguayan professor Javier del Rey Morato, a contemporary expert on
communications and journalism clearly explains it when he sustains that “The
quality of democracy depends on the quality of communication that is produced in
a democracy. Democratization is only effective because of its institutions,
through an improvement in the quality and the rationality of the social
communication produced in that society”.
Therefore, was it rational to publish such news about the declarations of Handal
in Cuba? Did this have any journalistic quality? Definitively not. And as he
said to some journalists: “This is such a ridiculous scandal”. The critical
thing is that this is a perverse scandal. Because this is nothing but a perverse
game to deform and manipulate the facts with the objective to destroy the
political opposition.
Tel: +503-210-6600 ext. 407, Fax: +503-210-6655 |