The positions taken with regard to the administration of the current Ombudsman for the Defense of Human Rights are defined with such clarity that they reveal more concerning power and political parties than would appear at first glance. For the government and for ARENA and its allies, the administration of Dr. Avilés —Doña Vicky, as the plain and simple people, with great affection, call her— is deficient; they are, therefore, opposed to her re-election. These government officials allege that the Ombudsman has been partial in the defense of human rights; that is to say, the sector which they represent does not feel that its rights have been guaranteed or sufficiently defended. But their objections represent no more than a general--not to say vague--appraisal. The malaise of government officials is the best evidence that the Ombudsman for the Defense of Human Rights has complied with her mission to an outstanding degree during her three years in office.

The office of the Ombudsman is charged with defending the fundamental rights of citizens when they must confront the state, with denouncing any violation of these rights and with demanding reparations in these cases. An Ombudsman faithful to her mission will necessarily clash with a government which, despite being assuredly committed to the right wing, in practice considers itself authorized to do as it pleases. It falls to the Ombudsman, then, to point out the abuses this government commits and to demand that it make amends and correct its errors; the Ombudsman must draw attention, as well, to the formalisms and falsehoods with which that government attempts to cover up its arbitrary acts. When the Ombudsman's office is faithful to that mission, it becomes a considerable obstacle to governments such as that of ARENA.

The official caste representing the government is not in favor of the re-election of Dr. Avilés for another reason, which focusses on the basis of the mandate assumed by an ombudsman for human rights. As a result of an inveterate deformation, Salvadoran presidents reject any kind of supervision. They consider that once they win the elections, they are delegated powers which authorize them to govern without any consideration other than their own conveniences, be these political or economic. Moreover, if in their governance, they seek the common good, they do not see why they should not take advantage of this unique opportunity to gain benefits for themselves, their family or party. They believe that in dedicating themselves to work for the country, they are authorized to obtain profits and benefits for themselves, their friends and their party as well. From this perspective, the only body which can exercise judgment upon the administration in office is the electoral body, and this only when it is convoked to participate in new elections, which could be the occasion for expressing disapproval of governmental conduct by not voting for the official party.

ARENA would like an "impartial" Ombudsman's office, which is a way of saying that it considers that Dr. Avilés' administration has acted in a partial manner, that is to say, it has acted in such a way as to be inclined to favor victims abused by public administration. At one point in time, spokespersons for officialdom accused Dr. Avilés of defending delinquents and criminals. What else is an ombudsman for human rights if not a defender of the victims of state power? The official sector has still not understood what the mission of the ombudsman's office is. An ombudsman who fully complies with her mandate without equivocation, will be a great bother for public functionaries-- even more so to the extent that these public servants are less than democratic in the carrying out of their functions.

ARENA does not consider it important for an organism which checks abuses of the state in the matter of individual rights to exist, because it considers itself alone to be the owner of the state. It is paradoxical that a party which prides itself on being a defender of individual rights would deny itself an independent organism for defending them against what principally threatens them. This paradox can, nevertheless, be explained given that we are dealing here with a party which considers itself the legitimate owner of the state; and that, in turn, leads us to another inconsistency, given that the neoliberals of the ARENA party are busily engaged in reducing that same state to its minimum expression.

The Christian Democratic Party and the National Conciliation Party consider themselves to be the owners of the Ombudsman's Office, seemingly oblivious to the fact that it is a state institution whose mandate is to help the victims of abuses of state power. For them, the Ombudsman's office is a very valuable political good, which, should one come to possess it, would enhance its own patrimony; or one could place it at one's own service. As a result, these parties consider that they themselves have the right to place one of their own members as ombudsman. The Christian Democratic Party considers itself to have the most rights in this particular consideration; although the National Conciliation Party does not stay too far behind in this regard. These two parties are still immersed in outdated ways of thinking, although, just as ARENA, they consider themselves to be proprietary owners of the state.

The FMLN and the Social Christian Union would support Dr. Avilés for re-election to the post, given that they consider that she has discharged her functions more than satisfactorily. The majority of the population (5l.3%, according to the last IUDOP poll) is in favor of her re-election because they know that the Ombudsman defends their rights, and above all she defends the rights of the most vulnerable (the poor, women and children). Nevertheless, the two parties mentioned above do not have the necessary votes; and public opinion, although overwhelming in this case, counts for little faced when with the conception of human rights upheld by officialdom, and faced, as well, with the political ambition of the parties allied to this official caste and the inconsistencies of the political class. For all of this, Dr. Avilés does not offer herself for re-election. With the very clear simplicity and dignity with which she has led the Ombudsman's office, she has declared clearly that she is not interested in continuing in the post.

A democratic state relies on a series of institutions; among these is the Ombudsman's Office for the Defense of Human Rights or a people's defender to supervise the actions of the power which, by its own nature, tends toward arbitrary acts. The more power it has (as in the case of the executive office), the greater the tendency towards abuse. It is precisely for this reason that it is not possible to substitute the defender of the rights and freedoms of the people though, doubtless, it is an irritant to those who govern. But it is indispensable for a democracy. Given the realities of Salvadoran power, the only ombudsman which could satisfy the official caste is one which would not supervise it nor intervene and would leave officials to their own devices. It is nevertheless the case that an ombudsman which does not irritate established power is an ombudsman which is unnecessary.

Employers' associations have very frequently called attention to the importance of private enterprise as the principal motor force behind production and jobs. Even without referring to the contributions of the labor sector, one can see that this is really only a half-truth. In El Salvador, employers have been characterized as flourishing at the expense of state protectionism.

It can be demonstrated historically that the bosses--especial the owners of big business--have used the state to maintain and increase their riches and profits. This has been possible, in great measure, because the most powerful employers have wielded influence in the various governments of the republic. Sad evidence of this fact is the despoiling of communal lands in order to cultivate coffee carried out by settled landowners during the government of President Zaldivar (1876-1885) and the measures taken by the dictatorship of Quiñonez-Melendez at the beginning of the twentieth century, both of which consolidated the economic power of the financiers, exporters and big coffee-growers. Just as noticeable is huge state investment and protectionism in customs operations carried out in order to start up industrialization at the beginning of the 1950's, activities in which the most prosperous businessmen in the country were engaged.

At present, the situation has not fundamentally changed, although it does exhibit different characteristics coherent with contemporary economic dynamics. Measures such as the elimination of taxes for export items, the reduction of taxes on profits and the liberalization for sales of the financial system have produced clear benefits for big business owners. At the same time, one cannot ignore the veto power which employers' associations enjoy over government initiatives which they consider harmful to their interests. It is in this context that measures such as the reduction of customs duties and the reduction of tax evasion have been blocked.

Recently, this situation was appraised by an international economist, a favorite of neoliberal apologists: Michael Porter, who visited El Salvador and talked with the country's principal business owners and politicians. Many of the positions expressed by Porter were especially hard on the business sector. This expert expressed his reservations concerning El Salvador's possibilities for development if the business owners' sector does not abandon its "old and corrupt ways of making money" and if, moreover, the aim is to promote growth based on runaway shops (maquila), given that "only countries which have little to offer attract investments through fiscal vacations". In this context, it is interesting to review some of Michael Porter's formulations, in the sense that these suggest that, as in the past, the business sector continues utilizing the state as a source of profit.

Basically, Porter noted that in El Salvador practices exist which conduct business based on government favors. In addition, according to the U.S. economist, the business sector is accustomed to take control of closed markets and complains constantly each time the government opts for creating regulatory laws or implementing regulatory measures. Speaking literally, the economist noted that it all adds up to complaining and in seeing who can better insult the government. They meet, they complain and then have a few drinks without improving the business environment by making concrete proposals". The point is to develop export capacity, but not only by creating tax-free zones for runaway shops (maquilas), given that "the laws of the tax-free zones create negative incentives", and for this reason it is necessary "to integrate and connect runaway shops (maquilas) with the rest of the economy".

Porter stated the following with regard to the financial system: "I believe that the financial markets and systems are a chronic weakness in all of Central America. There is insufficient mediation, the levels of mediation are too high, the banks are inefficient. There are really no low-cost sources for long-term financing. Part of the problem is the way the supervision of the bank has been politicized."

It is logical that the positions expressed by Porter raised suspicions among big business owners and their executives, who made themselves heard in the press. In synthesis, he pointed out that El Salvador's business sector is in no condition to insert itself adequately into a globalized international context, and this because it is accustomed to protectionism and to taking advantage of the government.

In reality, Porter said nothing new when he pointed out these things; nevertheless, what is particularly noteworthy is that these caveats came from sources which are considered to be friendly and favorable to the business and government sectors. The instrumentalization of the state as well as monopolistic and oligarchic practices are characteristic factors in place since the nation won its independence. The success of big businessmen has been linked to the adoption of policies for development designed on an ad hoc basis for the interests of big capital.

These policies have lead, deliberately or circumstantially, to a notable concentration of profits in the hands of big business together with the adoption of oligarchic practices clearly incompatible with economic efficiency and with the new tendencies toward opening markets and the ability to compete internationally. This is especially true in the case of industry where, for the decade of the 1980's, it is estimated that 82% of total industrial capital was concentrated in businesses with more than 50 employees. The case of aerial transport, which Porter criticized harshly, is even clearer.

Another even more questionable way of "doing business" not mentioned by this foreign specialist is the practice of maintaining salaries at the lowest level, salaries which do not exceed levels of extreme poverty. Low salaries are not a problem of insufficient value added, but do demonstrate a disproportionate distribution between remunerations for the workers and the profits derived from exploitation by the employers and owners. It is estimated that for every colon [Salvadoran currency] of value added in production, 59 cents go for profits from exploitation and only 30 cents for remuneration in the form of salaries.

The examination to which the employer and owner sectors have been subjected must be weighed and compared with the reality which currently confronts the country in terms of growth and development. There is not a business sector that has been able to enter the field where non-traditional exports are generated. Exports have expanded because of the proliferation of runaway shops (maquilas) and as a result of the creation of free-trade zones; if this situation had not obtained, total exports would not even reach two thirds of what is currently exported.

On the other hand, financial mediation has been clearly questioned even by the business sector itself, given that the high interest rates and the criteria for assignment of credits have become effective brakes slowing down the growth in activities of the productive sectors of the economy. Economic growth is lead, almost exclusively, by the service sector.

What is not being proposed here is an opening up of markets as the panacea for underdevelopment, given that this would entail more harm than benefit, but beyond this, it is in the national interest for the business sector to stop instrumentalizing the state and to stop paying poverty wages simply to maximize profits.

During the first week of March, the countries of the Central American region received a visit from the president of the World Bank (BM), James Wolfensohn, whose task it was to review the projects in which the capital acquired through concessions of this world organism was being invested. During his stay in the countries of the Central American isthmus, Wolfensohn emphasized, in general terms, the need for the governments to redouble their efforts at reducing the alarming indices of poverty suffered by the majority of the population. At the same time he recommended greater efficiency in institutional functioning in important areas such as tax collection, monitoring public spending, modernization of the state, privatization, and the administration of justice, among others. These are, evidently, important observations, if we take into account that they are meant to point out the general direction in which public bodies should go. Nevertheless, in Wolfensohn's evaluation of the Central American reality, there were blank spaces which could well indicate some of the underlying intentions of his tour: not letting the region slip out of the neoliberal logic which the World Bank has encouraged for several years now.

In formal terms, the World Bank would be interested in the disbursement of U.S. $ 300 million in credits to the region. It is for this reason that it is necessary to evaluate the results of previous investments provided by the bank. This is to say that, at a formal level, his objective was to learn what had been done with the money from the World Bank, an objective which, in and of itself, should not be a surprise to anyone. But behind this monitoring attitude there is also a certain interest in "normalizing" financial activities in the countries of the region and the ineluctable connections which join these activities to the areas of justice and monitoring the nation's expenditures.

As a result, the use to which the capital disbursed is being put is as important as the guarantee that that capital get to the places it should get to and that minimal institutional guarantees should exist to guarantee that that money will be used to the advantage of those who most need it. This is one way of reaffirming the function that the World Bank has assumed during this period: with a great deal of independence in its role as the financier of development in the most needful nations, it has become a body dictating guidelines which governments must comply with in order to maintain their status as receivers of credit for future loans. Wolfensohn, in each of the countries of the area which he visited, reaffirmed the World Bank's role as accounts-controller; moreover, he reinforced general conceptions of the role of government and the private sector in accordance with that pronouncement. The meeting which the bank functionary held in our country with businessmen from throughout Central America had as its objective to emphasize their character as principal agents for development in their respective nations, given their protagonism in the dynamics of globalized economy in our time.

The governments of the Central American countries, in the World Bank's perspective, must concern themselves with the social well-being of those sectors who most need it, but only when that concern does not affect processes of privatization currently underway. The responsibility of the state apparatus was defined in terms of the social service it could offer to the most unprotected populations. In the opinion of the President of the World Bank, the governments of the area have taken up this line of work in order to combat poverty--which affects the great majority of the population--and in order to solve the social problems which these various country are experiencing, for which reason he indicated that he was satisfied with the functioning of the actual presidents, in spite of his previous recognition of serious deficiencies in some of the important areas of national life. A good part of Wolfensohn's discourse was weighted with this concern for the "poor" of the region, which would then seem to require an analysis of the notion which the World Bank holds concerning poverty.

The World Bank, in its annual reports, presents indices for poverty corresponding to each country in which it has made some kind of investment. To achieve this objective it uses certain indicators (nutrition, health, education, access to housing and potable drinking water, among others) which provide the necessary data to determine the indices of poverty and, at the same time, to identify the areas which require more attention. Certainly, with respect to the definition of what it is to be "poor", one can find contradictory arguments--in fact, the definition of "poverty" is seriously limited by the criteria of subjective selection utilized at present to establish minimal indicators--, but this does not prevent one from recognizing the fact that the macroeconomic policies promoted by the World Bank, hand in hand with the International Monetary Fund(FMI), have not been of much use in complying with the objective which it now defends at all cost.

Moreover, improvements in the conditions which the World Bank proposes as fundamental for guaranteeing an optimal level of life for the population are not immune from being used by governments for their own electoral interests. To this it must be added that the measures recommended focus neither on directly benefiting citizens' acquisitive power nor do they strengthen the participation of civil society in decisions made by the state. Perhaps by owning better hospitals or housing which can be called "dignified"--something which, for all the rest, is far from being the case in El Salvador--may be a good indication of national development, but it does not imply substantial improvement in the areas of democracy or the respect for human rights.

One stone left unturned by the President of the World Bank has to do with Central American integration. Knowing that this process could be an effective means for the nations of the region to reach a homogeneous level of development, he did not once mention this factor in any of his declarations during the whole of his visit. Integration was seen as a condition which might permit achieving levels of effective productivity with fewer costs. Evidently the recipients of this "pat on the back" were the businessmen, especially those of the industrial sector. What is lacking here are important observations concerning the willingness of these economic sectors with regard to governmental integrationist plans, above all in countries such as Costa Rica and Panama, which, for now, have become the principal obstacles to the process.

Definitively speaking, what for some was a historic visit which will favor the rhythm of development in Central America, for others was an initiative with noticeable blank pages on social and regional questions. The fact that the countries of the region urgently need guidelines for integral progress is a concern not to be taken lightly. What this means is that human beings should not be left out of the discussion which establishes those guidelines, even less so when it is evident that diverse financial centers of the world are waiting to see documented evidence of integration among the nations of Central American isthmus in the area.

STRIKE. Striking doctors of the Salvadoran Social Security Institute (ISSS) decided, on March 3, to return to work in accordance with a judgment by the Labor Tribunal which found that the doctors had violated Article 221 of the Constitution of the Republic which reads: "public and municipal workers are prohibited from striking or engaging in the collective abandonment of their functions". "Taking into consideration the report of the Director of Labor that no proceedings had been presented promoting a labor conflict of an economic nature, and given that it is a question of an essential service, the strike is declared illegal", ruled the judge of the Fourth Labor Court, Irma Arelys Zelaya. The Secretary of Records and Agreements of the Medical Workers Union of the ISSS (SIMETRISSS), Evelyn de Cáceres, confirmed the decision to lift the strike, in spite of the fact that the union had not officially received judicial notification. "We will heed the order because we want to be in compliance with the law", she declared. Given this situation, María Julia Castillo, Director of the ISSS, stated repeatedly that she called for "harmony and agreement". "We will continue to hear them", the director noted, referring to the list of demands presented by the doctors. As a corollary, she advised the strikers that the days that they had not worked would be discounted from their salary checks; she also declared that with regard to economic matters, "there is nothing more to discuss" (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, March 6, p. 4 and 5).

DECLARATIONS. FMLN deputy Dagoberto Gutierrez presented, on March 5, the methodology that his party is using for the 1999 elections. "We are not hiding anything, we are simply carrying out slow, minute work with regard to the problems we are attempting to solve through our government platform...it is a question of recovering the political agenda to be placed before the electorate", stated Gutierrez. For the moment, the FMLN has not presented a candidate because if this were the case, as the Political Commission considers it, we would be diverting national attention from the problems which society is really complaining about. It is more a question of aiming to work on the basis of the problems which the country is experiencing and trying to find a solution through a platform rather than to begin a competition for image with the official party (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, March 3, p. 6).

CRISIS. The Director for Political Affairs of the Corporation of Municipalities of the Republic of El Salvador (COMURES), Marco Antonio Funes, revealed, on March 5, that a total of 96 municipalities throughout the country are confronting a financial crisis which makes it impossible to pay the upcoming salaries of their employees, as well as the bills for water, electrical energy and telephone services. According to Funes, part of the crisis is due to the fact that they have not yet disbursed to the municipalities the money approved by the Legislative Assembly, which has begun to cause malaise among the workers (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, March 6, p. 14).

EQUALITY. Various sectors of the population celebrated March 8, International Women's Day with a car caravan which circulated throughout San Salvador and artistic presentations in Cuscatlán Park. The President of the Republic, Armando Calderón Sol, emphasized in closed network radio and television broadcasts that "to make a new El Salvador also means eliminating inequality of the sexes in order to construct social peace". In the same context, Monsignor Fernando Saenz Lacalle, Archbishop of San Salvador, declared that he was in favor of equality between men and women (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, March 9, p. 6).

HEALTH. Health Minister Eduardo Interiano declared on March 7 that the doctors' strike at the Salvadoran Social Security Institute (ISSS) had been instigated by FMLN Deputy Miguel Saenz Varela together with some of the leaders of the Medical College. The state functionary said that this would indicate that the protest was politicized and that those involved in the planning had sought mechanisms to involve medical health units and other dependencies not part of the ISSS in the strike. The basis of the accusation is an alleged report from "people who were in these meetings". The Ombudsman for the Defense of Human Rights, Dr. Victoria de Avilés, said that the problem originates in structural failures in the health system (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, March 9, p. 8).

DEMANDS. Members of the Medical Workers' Union of the ISSS (SIMETRISSS) stated that, although they had returned to their workplaces, "the struggle continues", because their demands have still not been resolved. "We have not resolved anything; what we did is to discontinue the strike, but the struggle continues. Terms and strategies will come later; this is only a rest between rounds", declared Union General Secretary René Zapata Nieto. Zapata said that, given the present situation of conflict we have talked too much and the authorities have known for more than nine months now about the demands presented by the union. On the same point, the trade unionist reiterated the intention of his colleagues to seek other means of applying pressure (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, March 7, p. 8).

CANCELLATION OF DEBTS. Thousands of peasants led by the Agricultural and Livestock Forum of El Salvador marched peacefully on March 6 in an effort to convince the Legislative Assembly to cancel the agrarian debt. "We want them to give us a complete cancellation [of the debt] and this is the reason for the march," shouted some of the peasants. According to ARENA party deputies, the economic and fiscal impact resulting, should the peasants' proposals be accepted, must be analyzed. For their part, the PCN, FMLN, PDC, CD, PD, USC and PLD parties sent a letter on the same day to the President of the Republic, Armando Calderón Sol, in which they presented a unified position on the question of the agrarian debt (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, March 7, p. 14).