Colombia Considers Referendum for Political Reform

 
In a recent interview with El Tiempo newspaper, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe was asked how he thought the nation's political parties should work, and what sort of relationship he wanted to establish with them. "The relationship must be free of clientelism if it is going to change politics: regular dialogue, agreements, disagreements, and above all, respect." Uribe answered, adding, "Colombian democracy is expensive-it is wasteful, and stingy on social issues. This has to change." To pursue these goals, he has presented Congress with a proposed referendum on 16 points, among them: creation of a unicameral legislature (with the ability to revoke congressional mandates); greater decentralization of social investment; the consolidation or elimination of various state entities; the privatization of state-owned enterprises; cutting back on privileges enjoyed by public servants; and an end to compulsory military service.

For observers, the features of the referendum destined to have broad popular appeal include the call for nominal election of senators and congressmen, defining the grounds for their removal, channeling more resources into education and health, and eliminating redundant government agencies. Public opinion also is expected to support a one-house Congress.

This latter point has caused the most controversy. According to attorney Rafael Merchan, for example, "the problems of our discredited legislature don't lie in its size, but rather in the rules of the game that govern its membership and its work." Many influential columnists share this opinion. Juan Lozano blames Congress's ills on "its bad habits and a perverted political culture," while Hernando Gómez Buendía argues that "the solution is not abolishing the two houses, but differentiating their functions."

The Congress itself, needless to say, does not agree with the president's proposals, but it has expressed support for reforming the political parties and aspects of its own proceedings, including rules for the opposition's participation and the congressional seating plan.

Most observers applaud Uribe's initiatives as a step in the right direction toward strengthening Colombia's democratic institutions, but some critics are calling for deeper changes, including reform of the electoral and party systems. Merchan maintains that "we must guarantee more representative elected officials, stronger and more cohesive parties, real room for dissent by the opposition, and a dynamic and constructive executive-legislative relationship that eliminates clientelistic privileges." He adds, "so long as the country has a corrupt and divided institutional framework characterized by a lack of partisan discipline, clientelism and pettiness, we can expect few real changes from any political reform."

The debate on the issues has just begun, and the political climate seems open to considering ambitious proposals. Congress has indicated that it will accept most of the points of the referendum in exchange for a more far-reaching reform carried out by legislative action in conjunction with other lawmaking projects. An editorial in El Tiempo cites a range of favorable conditions not seen in recent years: "consensus on fundamental issues, legislative majorities aligned with the head of state; an opposition with its own proposals to present; and a public opinion that favors change."

We can only hope that the discussion will help Colombia build a more representative and legitimate political system that can in turn improve democratic conditions in the country. The government is showing leadership, and the work is under way. It is up to the other sectors of society to make a serious commitment to broadening the channels for political expression to enable the type of deep-rooted reform process that the nation needs.

See www.votebien.com for more information.