At its headquarters in Miami, Florida, the Interamerican Institute for Democracy (IID) presented next to infobae a series of reports on the state of democracy, cases of alleged violations of human rights and the validity of feudalism in Argentina.
The experts who participated in the event addressed, for example, what happened to Manuel Asencio Ardilesa 73-year-old farmer who lived in Santiago del Estero and died days ago, after having been stripped of his property.
The presentation was made within the framework of the forum called “The two Argentinas: democracy and feudalism”which was held this Wednesday and included the participation of a panel of prominent personalities and speakers critical of the national political situation.
It may interest you: The high price of the crimes of dictatorships for democracies
The work was carried out as part of the follow-up on the recommendations made by the UN, based on which the IID sent a mission to the country from its Human Rights Commission, which is chaired by Armando Valladaresa writer and former US ambassador who became known long ago for having been a political prisoner for 22 years, an opponent of the Cuban revolution.
Among the experts was the journalist Mariel Fitz-Patrickwho together with ivan ruiz and Sandra Crucianelli recently published a note that reviews who are the Argentine leaders who have been in office for decades.
“We detected that in a third of the Argentine provinces there is a phenomenon of permanence of their rulers in power, either through continuous re-elections or the appointment of political dolphins that respond to them. In practice, these districts become impregnable bastions to any opposition attempt, something that should set off an alert in any democracy”, explained the researcher.
The Fitz Patrick, Ruiz and Crucianelli report concluded that the Rodriguez Saa in Saint Louis, Gildo Insfran in Formosa, the Kirchner in Holy Cross, Gerardo Zamora and your partner, claudia abdalain Santiago del EsteroJuan Schiaretti In cordoba, and Jorge Capitanich in Chaco they are the provincial leaders who they lead the ranking of permanence in power. The phenomenon is repeated in several municipalities, especially in the province of Buenos Aires.
“This durability in the positions is also tied to the possibility of having resources that make these regimes be considered rentiers, that make use of a large part of the funds they receive from the Nation”, warned the journalist.
It may interest you: State terrorism prosecuted in Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua
The researcher remarked that this situation allows provincial leaders to “generate an eminently statist economy” that “increases dependency, both on businessmen who have contracts with the local state, as well as on people who have public employment and the media that they live by the official guideline”.
“There is a lack of public information that I, along with my colleagues, experienced at the time of writing the article. Added to this are also abuses of power and discretionary management in all spheres, which affect the rule of law, and cases of institutional violence by the Police that are not clarified ”, he completed.
Finally, Fitz Patrick gave the emblematic example of Gildo Insfran in Formosa, who “has 7 consecutive terms, 27 years as governor, plus another eight previous ones as lieutenant governor, (which adds up) 36 consecutive years, the longest period served by a president, without interruptions, since the return of democracy” .
The event began after 20:00 with the opening of Tomas Regaladopresident of the IID, former mayor of Miami, and former director of Radio Televisión Martí, the international Spanish-language radio and television service funded by the United States government that broadcasts Cuba.
“This year we are trying to take the agenda to a new level, participating directly in the national debates of important countries, in the case of today it is that of Argentina and the visit of directors of this institution to that country,” explained the presenter.
In this sense, Regalado pointed out that both Valladares and Fitz Patrick “have managed to bring, documented in text and video, personal cases that are irrefutable”, which he pointed out that it is “exactly what the press aspires to do.”
“Today we have the collaboration of infobae to report what is actually taking place in Argentina. It is also time to unmask those who say that it is a functional democracy, because this year Argentines are going to have to decide between light and shadow when they go to the polling stations, ”he added.
It may interest you: “Quo Vadis Brasil”: a colloquium of leaders and academics explored the prospects for democracy in the South American power
For his part, Valladares specified that between January 18 and 25 they were in Argentina “with the purpose of verifying in situ the complaints received for violation of human rights against citizens of Santiago del Estero who had been dispossessed of their lands.” by officials who exercise political and judicial power, with the most specific case of Manuel Asencio Ardiles and his family”.
“The Interamerican Institute for Democracy is commissioning a legal analysis of the process, which will include the arguments of the president of the Supreme Court of Justice, who is the one who has caused this whole situation. In my opinion, the violation of the human rights of the late Ardiles and his family have been flagrant because he submitted them to him and they are kept in a defenseless situation, ”added the former US ambassador.
As part of the panel, in addition to Fitz Patrick, were the lawyer, former diplomat and director of the IID, Marcel Feraud; international political analyst and professor at Georgetown University, Hector Schamis; the lawyer and political consultant Enrique Avogadro; the accountant and consultant, Norberto Spangaro; the ambassador in Israel and Costa Rica, Mariano Caucino; and the journalist and TV host, Hugo Macchiavelli.
“In many provinces, it is not taken into account that democracy is a method to reach power and to exercise it, and that when one lives in a presidential system, not having alternation in power means ceasing to have democracy in the medium or long term. This is part of the article infobaeSchamis noted.
For his part, Feraud assured that the Ardiles episode “is not an isolated case, but rather a pattern of conduct: the usurpation of land that occurs through a kind of machinery between the provincial and national power.”
Along the same lines as his colleagues, Caucino warned about the “emergence of internal enemies in the systems, such as populist models, who accept the democratic game, run for elections, but despise the division of powers, which is the true basis of the republican principle and federalism”.
“In Argentina, in 1983, when democracy was recovered, no province allowed reelection, today all allow it, except two, Santa Fe and Mendoza, and some even allow indefinite reelection,” he questioned.
The debate was moderated by Beatrice Rangela member of the Council on Foreign Relations of the United States, while the closure was left in the hands of Carlos Sanchez BerzainBolivian lawyer and politician who was a member of the cabinet of former President Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada.
“The advance of authoritarianism, which is the good word to hide the term dictatorship, which very few people want to pronounce, has been very great. What is called feudalism in Argentina are dictatorships: Santiago del Estero, Formosa, all these provinces in which there is no rule of law,” concluded Berzaín.
Keep reading:
