Editorial

Democracy and the fight against crime

Politics

Concerning the internal debate in the FMLN

Society

The Civilian National Police questioned once again

Society

Overpasses: an electoral project?

News Briefs

DEMOCRACY AND THE FIGHT AGAINST CRIME

During recent days the decision to deploy the army on the streets of the cities in order to fight crime has become one of the most important topics of public debate. It is clearly a sensitive topic; easy solutions and facile positions should be avoided, and it is therefore necessary to evaluate the possible pros and cons of a measure such as this with the greatest objectivity. One thing is certain: during this post-war period, criminal violence has reached alarming levels, together with other forms of violence, and this requires a prompt and efficient response from the authorities. And this response involves, among other matters, a component of coercion which cannot be overlooked. If individuals or groups trained in handling high-caliber fire-arms exist and these are ready to kill their victims in order to take their goods (this by means of direct robbery or kidnapping) the state's response must be just as resounding in its component use of force.

The message must be clear to all: no one who opts for the use of violence as a way of life must be stronger than the state, no one who opts for violence as a method of gaining wealth at the expense of others should believe that the weakness of the state puts that person at an advantage at the moment of carrying out his or her illegal schemes. But it is the responsibility of the authorities not to permit that at the heart of organized as well as unorganized crime no one gets the idea that the state is weak and incapable of responding with a force greater than their violent actions. If the conviction that the state is stronger than, for example, kidnappers and bank robbers does not take root in the world of crime--and it is to be feared that something like this might be taking place now--, the proliferation of criminal acts will be more and more unmanageable. And, as a consequence, the lives, security and goods of more citizens will be in greater danger.

It is precisely in a democratic order that the state has, as one of its basic objectives, the responsibility for guaranteeing the life, security and essential freedoms of those who are protected under its jurisdiction. So now, this commitment by the state presupposes and demands, if this is necessary, the use of force against those who place life, security and fundamental freedoms of its citizens in danger. We are not speaking of "placing them in danger" theoretically; it is not a question of "suspecting" the illegal activities of individuals or groups; it is a question of real kidnappings and assaults which are carried out by organized or semi-organized groups with communications equipment, transportation and sophisticated armaments. When faced with these activities which actually cause death, suffering and material losses, the state must protect its citizens even if it is necessary too use high-level dosages of force.

Nevertheless, that protection--the obligation that the state has to offer it--should not become a pretext to award it with attributes which place it above or even against society; this is to say, in order to convert the state into an anti-democratic body. We know from our recent past what it can be like when the state becomes the ultimate and absolute judge of what is good for society or what is not good for it. We need a democratic state, not a police state. We need a state where, in the context of respect for the essential rules and values of democracy, guarantees to all who respect and accept to live in the context of those values, or not violently to undermine them (as when robberies, murders and kidnappings have become a way of life outside of that democracy, although these recognize certain rights), the possibility to live in peace and tranquility.

We do not need a state that, under the pretext of defending our life and property, violates democratic order, suspects everyone at all times, orients itself toward the presumption of dangers, the authorship of which can become the accusation of anyone (preferably political enemies), who order search and seizure operations and review of documents every time the leader at the moment wishes to... If we believe minimally in democracy, we ought to voice a strong "no" to a police state. Yes, we need a state which has the most efficient and adequate mechanisms to combat criminality in its most diverse manifestations. And, among these mechanisms, the police play a role of primary importance.

What still is not understood in the conscience of many social, economic and political sectors, is the idea that it is necessary for a police force to be provided with human, financial and technological resources which permit it to guarantee citizen security efficiently. There are those who believe that it is sufficient to increase the number of police agents and that it is sufficient to provide them with the significant firepower so that crime can be diminished. Without discounting this as a relevant factor, it is still not sufficient; police with adequate levels of education in the respect for human rights and with sufficient competence in the handling of more sophisticated technologies for fighting crime are required as well. Without doubt, this last point is of special importance given that in the measure that police technological capabilities and resources are below those at the disposal of criminal elements--for example, in communications, transportation and armaments--they will continue to enjoy a greater advantage.

With a competent, well-trained police force which respects human rights and is decidedly ready to fight crime with the firm determination which the situation requires, the use of that other resource of state coercion, the army, becomes unnecessary. Those who call for placing the army in the streets should not forget the dangers that militarization of the society could call forth amid the process of attempting to restore democracy. During the past decade we have had enough of military patrols and outposts in towns and cities; as a collateral effect of that policy, we suffered abuses of authority, mistreatment and intimidation. It is not healthy to open up even the most remote possibility that military personnel could again control our society.

The fight against crime and for the conservation of democracy are not mutually exclusive--much to the contrary. To defend the idea that in order to fight crime it is necessary to violate the state of law is to throw our lot with authoritarian practices which, when least expected, end up turning against those who proposed them.

CONCERNING THE INTERNAL DEBATE IN THE FMLN

It is by now a well known fact that the fall of the socialist block brought with it a profound crisis in the left on a world level. This crisis especially affected those groups fully identified with the Soviet revolution, as is the case with some Latin American guerrillas, among whom is to be found a firm proposition in favor of armed revolution--that is to say, the taking of state power by means of arms and the installation of a socialist regime. The fall of the USSR posed an unavoidable question for the destiny of the left: If the Soviet regime had shown itself to be a failure, was it legitimate to continue considering it as the model for the construction of a new social order? And in the decision to change it, what should be adopted as its replacement?

Today, the political systems of Latin American countries are mainly democracies. Earlier movements which took up arms are now political parties which are seeking, along with others, the votes of the people. In El Salvador, not only have previously insurgent groups become part of the democratic life of the society, but they have, moreover, come to achieve a noteworthy and preponderant presence in the political spectrum. However, the question of which path should be taken by those who uphold socialist ideas continues to take center stage. What should be the role of the left in a democratic context? What position should be taken on questions of social, political and economic dynamics which orient life in the present-day world? How should the revolutionary struggle be regarded from the point of view posed by this new reality? And how can socialism be conceived of? These appear to be some of the questions which permeate debate inside and outside of the left.

This is so much so that the fact that in the most representative Salvadoran left party, the FMLN, these two counterposed lines of thinking exist simultaneously and, far from being an isolated case, reflect the open discussion of the role of the left in the current order of things. The existence of orthodox and progressive "tendencies" at the heart of the FMLN is a particular manifestation of a problematic with which all of those who at one point in time engaged in the effort to transform society by means of armed struggle. The root of the question seems to lie in the resistance of some to abandon traditional modes of discourse when faced with the disposition of others to adapt themselves to changes imposed by reality.

In the National Convention of the FMLN held in September of last year, this internal struggle was already seen to be present. Since that time, Shafik Handal and Salvador Sanchez Cerén have been the representatives of the orthodox line of thinking while Facundo Guardado became the head of the progressive group. The debate came to light once again in May of this year when newspapers published a document called Concerning the Course of the FMLN, in which those of the progressive line were accused, among other things, of being pragmatists, of being interested only in winning elections, of deviating from the center and of accepting some of the precepts of neo-liberalism.

It is more than enough to say that this document--which, all other things being equal, is largely inconsistent and simplistic--is not signed and it is not clear to whom it is addressed: diminishes its seriousness. Concerning the Course... was, as might be expected, attributed to Shafik Handal and Sanchez Cerén. But neither of these two persons accepted responsibility for writing it. When it was published, both Sanchez Cerén and Facundo Guardado stated that it was not an official document. The document, in fact, appears more to have been written privately by some members of the party than the official manifesto of a group of nonconformists. Be that as it may, what is certain is that the appearance of Concerning the Current Course... made evident once again that the struggles inside the FMLN cannot be hidden.

The existence of two tendencies inside the FMLN does not imply the grave situation that the news media attempted to give it. It is nothing new to anyone that the FMLN is the product of the fusion of various groupings and that the differences among them have not yet disappeared. FMLN leaders who see in the debate inside the party as a healthy and natural exercise are right. What is worrisome is that one of the poles of that debate has taken up the banner of obsolete discourse. Those who wrote the document should be asked how many Salvadorans share with them the idea that society should be understood in terms of class struggle; how many are disposed to accept a party that speaks of bad rich people and good poor people; how many consider that Bases for a National Plan is nothing more than part of the neo-liberal offensive...

There is no doubt that the most noticeable premise presented in Concerning the Course... is a reaffirmation of class struggle as an important part of party ideology. That society experiences the dynamics of class struggle means that poor and rich confront each other, and that given this, the only possible solution is for the workers to overthrow the oligarchic exploiters by force of arms in a strategy guided by a party which is the instrument and vanguard of the proletariat. These premises do not allow for dialogue or intermediate solutions because what is posed is simply two groups confronting each other in a struggle to the death.

It is curious to note that in another passage, the document proclaims the need for the FMLN to recover the leadership of consensus-building because this process has fallen into the hands of the bases. How is it that the class struggle can be resolved by consensus-building? That is another of the questions pending for those who wrote Concerning the Course... It appears that the detractors of the conception of renewal do not have the terms of their questioning very clear. Is it the case that this document is the expression of a good part of their fellow members in the FMLN? Or is it nothing more than the private expression of a small group of people suffering from resentment and nostalgia? It is of course important that there be, inside the FMLN, those who remind the party that the ideal of social justice is what ought to guide the political struggles of that party. But that in order to accomplish this a certain group has made use of out of date and unsustainable arguments is nothing more than nonsense. The FMLN would probably win over many more sympathizers if it were not for the ideological backwater of those anonymous writers who consider themselves to be the depositories of the ultimate truth of the Salvadoran left.

It is an error to see in the debate over the role of the left the Achilles' heel of the parties which take up the ideological banners similar to that tendency. That debate is, over and above being necessary, the most healthy phenomenon that could take place inside political parties with a socialist identity. But the discussion will never bear the expected fruit if those who participate in it do so from the viewpoint of dogmatic positions. It is a question of those who propound left ideas truly being among the protagonists of the restoration of democracy, that their proposals become real alternatives in counter position to the right-wing project and that their intervention in political life not be limited merely to capricious opposition without any basis. Nevertheless, that protagonism which presents proposals will be impossible to reach while inside those parties there does not exist the consciousness of the need for open and honest debate. No one has the last word on what the left is or ought to be because that is exactly what remains to be determined. In order to determine this, it will be necessary to leave aside irrationality and narrow-mindedness which indefectible accompany dogma.

THE CIVILIAN NATIONAL POLICE QUESTIONED ONCE AGAIN

1996 was the year of debate on crime and public security. It was the year in which a wide range of measures to put a stop to one of the major problems confronting the country was suggested, rejected and adopted. The lesson which should have been drawn from that period was that the government and the institutions charged with public security lack an integral and well-founded vision for understanding and efficiently confronting the phenomenon of criminal violence.

The confrontations which took place two years ago as a result of that were, up to a certain point, to be expected. Neither the government nor anyone in the society was prepared, theoretically or practically, to deal with crime of such overwhelming proportion. Neither the inexperienced and inefficient PNC nor the country's tottering justice system could deal with a phenomenon which grew by leaps and bounds. Experiments abounded: the failed attempt to reinstitute the death penalty for serious crimes, the "Neighborhood Watch" project, the entering into effect of the Emergency Law against Crime, the formulation of the potentially harmful law for Social Defense, the call to deploy the army in the streets...

In this year, violent crime has not diminished; on the contrary, data shows that it has increased. And what is worse, it seems that nothing has been learned about the causes of the failure to combat it. The debate which arose this month on the topic and the proposals which have emanated from it are overwhelming proof of the latter. In recent weeks, as in 1996, the astounding lack of clear ideas about how to fight crime has taken the fore. The two years which have passed since the crusade against crime began seem to have left us in the same place where we began.

The only important novelty has been the unusual harshness with which President Armando Calderón Sol criticized the PNC and in response to which Mr. Hugo Barrera, Minister of Public Security, and Mr. Rodrigo Avila, Director of the police force, could only admit that the police, as the President said, appear to be incapable of fighting crime. This has caused the PNC to be the center of public attention once again and this with a good deal of justice; but it impedes as well the adoption of a global vision of the problem--something which the government has always resisted doing.

Although the president affirmed that the judges had had something to do with the failure of the fight against crime, he was clear and outspoken in his affirmation that it was upon the leadership, the middle-level officials and agents of the PNC upon whom the responsibility for the intensification of the phenomenon falls. According to Mr. Calderón Sol, the PNC, with all of the necessary economic and material resources, was dormant when confronted with criminal activity; therefore, he as mediator of the demands of the population, was obliged to demand of the police force "greater effort" in the work they do.

Certainly the PNC has obtained few successes in the fight against crime, but to explain this fact solely as a lack of will, or as a negligent laziness is reductionist and irresponsible. It is obvious that the deficiencies in the work of the PNC have many sources. Among them are: the very inexperience of a police force only recently formed, the lack of advanced technological equipment, the lack of familiarity with the new penal norms, the absence of specialized units of scientific crime detection. Something which the president seems to have been forgotten--and not without a certain malice--is that, even were the PNC very capable, its efforts would save it from the abyss of dispersion only if it were to act in the context of a global plan for fighting crime. Such a plan does not exist--nor has it for two years now.

The problem lies, then, in that this lack is being deliberately evaded. The reasons vary, but two principal reasons strike the eye: on the one hand, the lack of a global plan frees every one of the actors involved from the need to assume responsibilities equally in the fight against crime. If that phenomenon increases, it will always be possible to hang the responsibility around someone's neck in particular--in this case it was the PNC's turn; afterwards it will be the judges, the citizenry or some other. On the other hand, this is more than convenient for the President of the Republic because it absolves him from the responsibility to assume the political costs of such a level of crime. As we have seen, the president washed his hands of the matter and held the PNC responsible for the problem. If a global plan for fighting crime existed, the president, as head of the government, would have to accept the responsibility for its failure because his leadership would have failed for not having effectively coordinated the participants in such a plan.

OVERPASSES: AN ELECTORAL PROJECT?

During the first six months of 1998, the construction of vehicular overpasses, one of the central elements in the plan for reordering vehicular traffic in San Salvador which ought to have been taken on in stages and in a more rational manner two years ago, was set off in a hurried and haphazard way. The results up to now are astounding in the chaos, gridlock and traffic jams of enormous proportions in evidence on the principal streets of the capital city.

The use of detours and the services of the PNC to regulate traffic on streets which have been partially or totally closed off because of construction, have been insufficient measures for remedying the traffic congestion which the construction of the overpasses have caused. Of course problems of traffic flow were to be expected, given that the city's streets are narrow, one-way, and in only a few cases do alternate routes for moving from one place to another in the capital exist. On these streets the number of automobiles increases daily.

But the way in which the Ministry of Public Works (MOP) has planned the construction of the overpasses lacks a rational plan. So much so that even the Vice-Ministry of Transportation has asked to defer the beginning of some of the constructions as San Salvador faces the imminent collapse of vehicular traffic flow. The fear and alarm expressed by the Vice-Ministry is not unjustified: to begin simultaneous construction in this city with only a few city blocks of distance between construction sites is simply outrageous.

The reasons held forth by MOP to justify its actions (the loans for financing the construction were recently won and these must be implemented simultaneously in order not to wait four or more years before the project is finished) were not convincing and even oblige one to look for explanations in the realm of politics. It is difficult not to believe that what is being sought in a premeditated way is to achieve the completion of the constructions at the highest point of next year's electoral period. Although Mr. Calderón Sol finishes up his term of office in not very good standing, ARENA could use the construction of a good number of overpasses in a short period of time in its campaign.

Were it not so, how can one explain why the construction of the overpasses--or, at least, some of them--could not have waited until the end of winter which, because of the obstacles that this season caused in the process of construction, has already delayed presentation of one of the overpasses? What is the reasoning behind pursuing the project even while flying in the face of common sense and practical reality in San Salvador?

In what can be observed up to the present moment, all seems to indicate that in the construction of the overpasses can be seen objectives to be completed which are more related to political questions than criteria based on urban engineering and ordering. One cannot fail to notice that the preference is for closing off--at the same time--several of the nerve points for vehicular traffic in such a way that in each project a reduced number of workers is engaged in construction work (a handful of men working is out of all proportion to the importance of the constructions), rather than the concentration of efforts and resources in a single point with the objective of saving time and reducing problems.

It is obvious that the road to clearing up vehicular chaos in San Salvador cuts momentarily across periods in which vehicular chaos is accentuated. So it is then that an increase in bottlenecks and the extreme difficulty in transportation is the price which must be paid for getting rid of both problems. Nevertheless, that this, in some degree, must be this way ought not to serve as an excuse for not implementing a well-thought-out reordering of traffic patters which responds more to the urban needs of the capital city than to interests foreign to those needs. In El Salvador, politics and rationality are mutually exclusive spheres and the project which MOP intends to implement is just another example of this.

ARMY. In response to a proposal by some of the political parties that the army be deployed in the streets to fight crime, the Director of the National Civilian Police, Mr. Rodrigo Avila, expressed his consideration that it was unnecessary to use the armed forces in urban areas. Mr. Avila proposed, nevertheless, to reinforce with more military personnel the "Guardian Plans" which are focussed on the rural areas, concentrating, in this way, a greater number of police in the cities. According to the police official, before declaring a "national emergency", it is necessary to analyze the reasons for the increase in criminal activity. For his part, the Vice President of the Republic, Mr. Enrique Borgo Bustamante, considered that, given the increase in criminal activity, a police presence is necessary, but not so the use of the army. He added that the laws were under revision so that the presence of the PNC not only in the city but also in the countryside could be evaluated. A different position was expressed by the President of the Supreme Court, Mr. Eduardo Tenorio, who indicated that the army was an "option" among logical possibilities . Meanwhile, the Attorney General of the Republic, Mr. Manuel Cordoba, explained that, although the deployment of the armed forces represented a risk, it does not signify that its use might not be convenient. The situation "must be weighed and evaluated [to establish] up to what point it would be useful," Mr. Córdova declared (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, June 11, pp. 4-5.)

PERSONNEL. On June 11, Minister of Defense, Jaime Guzman Morales, confirmed that the army will increase the number of military personnel to be deployed in support of the PNC patrols. According to these declarations, the Joint Task Forces (GTC) which will receive greater military support are part of the "Guardian Plans", operations which are in place in the rural zones of the country. "It was a decision taken jointly by the police authorities, the President of the Republic and the Armed Forces because of concern over the increase in the level of crime", explained the military officer. He said that military support to the police is not an indication of police weakness, but rather an effort to relieve the police of tasks for which soldiers are better trained. According to Guzman Morales, the increase in the number of soldiers does not imply a significant increase in the Army's budget, but, should it be necessary, adjustments would be made within the military institution. Military spokespersons revealed that the number of Joint Task Forces could be increased by up to fifty per cent, which would represent an increase of 200 more groups. On the other hand, at the petition of the PDC, the Legislative Assembly's Security Commission could consider it convenient to broaden the coverage offered by the "Guardian Plans" to include urban zones (EL DIARIO DE HOY, June 12, pp. 10-14).

FMLN. On June 11, Dr. Victoria Marina de Avilés, the former Ombudsman for the Defense of Human Rights, presented her application to join the FMLN party and declared that she was disposed to represent it as a candidate in the 1999 presidential elections. "For the first time in my life I am going to join a political party, [and this] at the request of social organizations which see in the Front a hope to build democracy", she explained. Dr. de Avilés proclaimed that one of her goals was to give to women the space they are demand in politics and to encourage a program of Government Consensus-Building, which is currently under consultation at a national level. The former Ombudsman added that among her priorities will be to support the institutions created by provisions of the Peace Accords and to present clear policies on children, women and senior citizens. For his part, San Salvador municipal council member, Mr. Hector Dada Hirezi announced that he will not join the FMLN should he become a pre-candidate for that party. "I don't see why I should join. One does not join in order to become a candidate, but rather when one is in total agreement with the positions of the party," he argued. Mr. Dada Hirezi said he was disposed to negotiate a candidacy in order to represent a political and social alliance or a national movement that would "move the country out of its current position" (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, June 12, p. 6 and EL DIARIO DE HOY, June 12, p. 14).

COURT ACTION. The Ministry of Public Works (MOP) has presented five court actions before the first and second treasury courts against the Constructora Siman, S.A. bank and against Arco Engineers, charging them with deterioration in streets which they constructed and which were guaranteed to last for twenty years. The deficient quality of the five street and highway constructions in San Salvador and the supposed refusal of those against whom the court action was brought to pay the charges imply, according to MOP, claims representing a loss of five million colones. The executive director of the Project Coordinating Unit of MOP, Mr. Roque Rodas, explained that there are judicial proceedings against more construction companies for the same reason. The five court actions mentioned have been before the courts for a year now. The prosecutor for the case, Mr. Mario Donald Salazar, said that last March the Attorney General of the Republic was notified that the court actions had not been admitted because the contract for the implementation of the works projects is regulated by arbitration to deal with the economic conflicts between the parties. According to sources in MOP, the Central American Economic Integration Bank (BCIE), which financed the projects, has withheld 10% of the costs in each of the projects and that money will be disbursed only when the damages have been repaired (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, June 13, p. 5).

ALLIANCE. The FMLN and the USC parties planned to make their political alliance official on June 15. The General Director of the Soyapango municipality, Mr. Jose Antonio Guardado, member of the USC, explained that "when Front members were armed, they were radical, but proof of their change is that they are electing pre-candidates internally, and this builds confidence that there is a democratic opening. If they have accepted an alliance with us--we who are a small center group--this means that they are open to [achieving] understandings with the population". Mr. Guardado added that it would be "anti-historical" for social christians to be against a left which has demonstrated that it has undergone changes. The two political allies began to work jointly on a government plan for National Consensus-Building that has been submitted to consultation, whose most relevant points are, among others: to fight corruption at all levels, to reform the laws governing the financial system and to institute an independent general controller's office nationally which would be in charge of monitoring national public treasury income. One June 15 the receipt of formal presentations of the observations held concerning the Government Plan by distinct citizen sections was closed. According to explanations presented by Mr. Guardado, after studying the observations, the information will be summarized and transferred to high level commissions of the different political forces (LA PRENSA GRAFICA, June 15, p. 8).