Proceso 906
June 14, 2000
ISSN 0259–9864
 
 
 

INDEX

Editorial Intelligence put to the wrong use
Politics Questions on the topic of telephonic espionage
Economy The impact of the application of the Value Added Tax on agriculture and livestock products
Society The president and his communications policies
 
 
 

EDITORIAL

    A judicial complaint presented by a telecommunications business (Saltel) has been the occasion for recognizing the fact that telephonic espionage in El Salvador exists and has led the entity charged with supervision to impose a fine (more symbolic than real) upon the telephonic business responsible, the majority of which is the property of the French transnational Telecom. The initiative did not come, then, from the Superintendence, but from the owner of Saltel. Were it not for the judicial complaint, the superintendence would never have taken action against Telecom, the business which lent itself to third parties who intervened in the telephone calls of its users, even when this was widely known to be happening. One should recognize that, at times, as in this case, institutions comply with their responsibilities only if pressure is applied. Left to themselves, they fall into inertia even more so when it is a question of powerful transnational. The existence of telephonic espionage implies a violation of citizens’ right to privacy, which is guaranteed by the Constitution. Those who commit such violations —because it is clear that Telecom was only the means or medium allowed use by a third party— although the government, politicians and press allege that they were not unaware of such violations taking place.

    On the basis of the Saltel complaint, it has been recognized that the PCN, PDC and ARENA administrations, without exception, have violated the privacy of the citizens for eminently political ends. Some even dare to argue that during the decade of the 1980’s this practice was understandable. During that time, espionage was carried out by ANTEL and the Armed Forces were in charge of the work. Military personnel listened even to Cristiani and Calderón Sol. The Peace Accords and the privatization of the activity changed the panorama. The former relieved military personnel of the responsibility, at least in a formal way, from security and passed this responsibility to the recently created Organism of State Intelligence, and the latter made it very difficult to continue with this task, because, from being just one business, telecommunications businesses became various businesses. At one point in time, which has still not been clarified, the equipment was removed from the old ANTEL offices, but the telephone numbers continued to be listened in on and the conversations continued to be monitored. >From this follows the interest of the ex -director of the organism and current Chief of the National Civilian Police, as the Constitution was modified, which prohibits this kind of activity. Because it is clear that the constitutional prohibition has not in the least prevented the government administrations of the last three decades from tapping the telephones of the citizenry. What they did not count on was that with the privatization of the telecommunications enterprises, the possibility would be opened up for demonstrating that privacy was being violated. Even less they supposed that a judicial complaint would be filed.

    When Telecom bought ANTEL, it inherited the wire-tapping of telephones and permitted it to continue up until a short time ago. All of the directive bodies of ANTEL did the same and it is to these also that the Prosecutors’ Office of the Republic must ask for a rendering of accounts, establishing thereby, their civil and penal responsibilities. It is very difficult to believe that they did not know what was going on under their very nose, the military personnel first of all and the Presidential House intelligence services afterwards, had wire-tapped certain telephones when this activity was in the public domain, as can be demonstrated by existing tapes. The UCA itself has a copy of a taped telephone conversation of its Rector, Ignacio Ellacuría with the Rector of the National University of El Salvador.

    It turns out, then, to be ridiculous that the government, the politicians and the right-wing block as well as the press itself, was so fearful in some cases, that it has not been possible to identify, even who the person is who is finally responsible for the violation of privacy. Some high government functionaries in the Flores administration have attempted to divert attention away from the issue by attributing espionage to organized crime, but without underestimating its logistical capacity. But others, who were more cautious, preferred to await the result of various investigations which, it was hoped, would lead nowhere, as usual. One does not have to have a very active imagination in order to conclude that the state is the only body with the capability for implementing this operation. Only military personnel, during the recent past, and the Organism of State Intelligence, currently, have the power necessary for intercepting telephone conversations, including the President of the Republic. So it is, then, that the task of the Prosecutor General is not very complicated. It is not very difficult to figure out where the ANTEL equipment was located, nor who operated it. As it is also not very complicated to verify when, where and who moved it; nor who ordered a continuation of the wiretapping, nor its purpose. The Flores administration, the politicians of the right-wing and the press know perfectly well, but do not dare to recognize it or perhaps even prefer not to admit it because of all that this would imply. Again, to forget about it is the best solution to what is a clear and flagrant constitutional violation.

    The objective of this violation of law and citizen freedoms has not been to investigate crime, but to spy on political adversaries. At least, this is what can be concluded from a review of the telephone numbers which have been proved to have been wire-tapped. The Organism of State Intelligence will have to openly demonstrate that this is not the case. But this can be denied, alleging confidentiality. Another argument exists, however, which provides evidence of the political objective of this illegal activity by the Salvadoran government. It has been proven to be the case that three ARENA administrations have used telephonic espionage for years. During this time, the current director of the National Civilian Police and the ex director of the state intelligence services, Mauricio Sandoval, has had at his disposal this instrument with no control or judicial supervision to slow down his work. And even so, he has not been able to win the battle against organized crime. Nor has he been able so much as to control the kidnapping industry. Therefore telephonic espionage has not been at the service of public security, but has, instead, served the political party in office. To judge by the final destination of the information received, it is highly unlikely that the Organism of State Intelligence lacks the capacity for processing the presumed information gathered on criminal activity.

    To those who still defend the necessity for authorizing telephonic wire-tapping, by court control, in order to combat organized crime, this state of affairs ought to make them think twice. It has been shown that this mechanism, which has been used for many years, does not provide the desired results and one cannot maintain reasonable hopes that these goals will be reached while this mechanism is led and directed by functionaries currently in office. When the National Civilian Police chief of police asks for authorization to listen in on telephonic communication, what he is asking, in reality, is authorization to engage in the practice of political espionage. Nevertheless, this “discovery” is a new opportunity for taking up, in a radical way, the question of public intelligence perverted and put to the wrong use.

POLITICS

    “Telephonic espionage” is the name of the new scandal which has rocked Salvadoran political life. A few days ago, a resolution by the General Superintendence of Energy and Telecommunications (SIGET) to fine the telephonic enterprise CTE-Telecom was made public. The resolution maintained that CTE-Telecom “had violated [the right to] secrecy in communication by interfering in or intentionally intervening in [such communication] (sic)”. The existence of what is, in reality, telephone wire-tapping was revealed in a complaint brought by Saltel —another telephonic enterprise— to SIGET, in which it requested an investigation of what it suspected was telephone intervention (wire-tapping) of telephones of people who were supplied with service by CTE-Telecom, while the company has discounted this accusation, explaining that it has not listened in on calls, but only “re-routed” them. Moreover, the Saltel complaint arises from a difference with this enterprise which is under study by the American Arbitration Association in New York.

    What, at first glance, appears to be a commercial dispute between technicians and experts of the two communications enterprises has, nevertheless, occasioned intervention by the Prosecuting Attorney’s Office and Legislative Assembly of El Salvador. It is worth remembering that the Constitution of the Republic, in Article 24, sternly prohibits telephone wire-tapping. The accusation of “intentional intervention” of telephone calls, therefore, constitutes a serious crime in violation of the constitution which “merits penal action and punishment of those who committed the crime”, according to the prosecuting attorney in the case. And, on the other hand, the intervention by the Legislative Assembly is the result of complaints —according to Deputy Francisco Merino, ex-Vice-President of the Republic and ex-superintendent of Telecommunications, Orlando de Sola— of the existence of a network of telephone spying instigated by the State Intelligence Organism (OIE). The “re-routing” of calls, then, is not a technical decision with objectives strictly within the realm of communication, but which responds to other motives —perhaps political— with a well organized structure originating from the presidential palace which has been functioning for some time now and of which ex-presidents Alfredo Cristiani and Armando Calderón Sol are well aware. Likewise, given the nature of the declarations by those bringing the complaints, one should not be surprised if Francisco Flores is also aware of the telephone wire-tapping espionage carried out by the OIE.

    For the time being, the Attorney General’s Office has initiated investigative procedures leading to an attempt to determine who the responsible party is in this case. At any rate, the answer to the question by those responsible for the crime of telephonic espionage —is it the CTE-Telecom, the two ex-presidents, or Flores?— will help get to the bottom of the matter in order to discover all of the ramifications and the identity of the persons involved. Ought not this inquiry include another fundamental question: Who benefits from this “re-routing” of telephone calls?

    The business against whom the complaint was raised seeks to clarify that procedure, making reference to Code B-9, which ostensibly seeks to benefit the telephone patron by re-routing calls to avoid congestion in telephone lines. And so, contrary to what the Superintendence and Saltel another point of view is that it is a procedure used to improve telephone service by guaranteeing clean and rapid communication. There is no reason for alarm, they allege, given that CTE-Telecom is an honest enterprise which respects the rights of its fee-paying patrons. For this reason, they will appeal the SIGET decision, which, in its way of seeing things, “is not lawful”. But, for the moment, what has not been clarified by CTE-Telecom is why, when it decided “to re-route” the calls by means of procedure B-9, ignored a clause in the SIGET regulations which define Code B-9 as telephone users intercepted. How can Salvadorans know exactly what happened? How can they know if an espionage structure is at work? Or, who listened in on the calls? The OIE? Has organized crime had access to the intercepted calls?

    In the case of the OIE, the well-founded suspicion of telephonic espionage involves, in the first place, its ex-director and current Chief of the National Civilian Police (PNC), Mauricio Sandoval. What does Sandoval know about telephonic espionage, the motives for it and to what use it is put? What are his current links to the OIE? What information could he offer to clarify the situation? The Attorney General’s Office investigation ought to throw light on these questions, but it can do so only if it centers its attention on figures such as Sandoval. For this reason, the declarations and investigations of the ex-presidents Cristiani and Calderón Sol are of crucial importance. The ex-presidents, according to complaints gathered by the media, knew of the existence of such espionage and did nothing to halt it, even though they were aware that it was unconstitutional. All in all, the most important thing is to determine the ends for which such telephonic espionage was used in the state intelligence system.

    The telephone numbers that were wiretapped show that some sectors of trade unions and important political personalities were monitored by the state. What is the motive for listening in on telephone calls by businessmen and political opposition figures? Has there been some kind of blackmail involved in this practice? It is difficult to answer these and other questions. It nevertheless calls attention to the great confidence which the current PNC police chief enjoys from the President of the Republic. The president was not aware of the results of a poll which located the Minister of Education as the best-evaluated functionary in the current governmental team who made an apology for the Chief of the PNC to whom she attributed the greatest popular sympathy in the group of government functionaries. What does this functionary know which might merit his enjoying such confidence?

    But the most serious part of the matter is, should the direct participation of the OIE in a state espionage network be proven, the enormous step backwards this would imply for constitutional guarantees in El Salvador. Mechanisms for the functioning of the state intelligence service were established by the Peace Accords. It fell to the Legislative Assembly to play an overarching role in the control and definition of a State Intelligence Organism which would benefit all of society. If it should turn out to be the case that espionage was encouraged behind the back of the Legislative Assembly, not only would the Constitution of the Republic be violated (a serious act in and of itself), but also that instruments and control structures which were in place in the past can be shown to have been maintained: these are the structures and controls which were used to eliminate opponents of the governmental regime. If things were not this way, those responsible for national security would have no motive for ignoring legal precepts which demand control of the Legislative Body over the State Intelligence services.

    On the other hand, another interesting question in the Salvadoran context is the possibility that espionage can have been used to benefit organized crime. The inefficiency and lack of capacity of the public security authorities in El Salvador to control organized crime is a well-known fact. The crime wave which currently wracks the country has been revealed to be in possession not only of sophisticated and high-caliber armaments, but to be in possession, as well, of a surprising degree of operative and logistical capability, much greater than that of the PNC itself. There are, moreover, strong indicators that the police itself has been infiltrated by organized crime which, has also perhaps, also infiltrated areas of the state apparatus. Could all of this have some relationship to telephone espionage?

    The current investigation by the Attorney Generals Office must clear up these questions. Perhaps the depth to which the investigation of telephonic espionage goes could help answer a question raised by the citizenry, which the Attorney General’s Office made echo in recent days. The question involves so-called “sacred cows”, the brains behind the kidnappings, narcotics trafficking and money-laundering. Dealing with these issues seriously, the questions raised by the investigation begun by the Legislative Assembly ought to help define the political responsibilities of the ex-government functionaries and current high-level functionaries as well as their commitment to democracy, respect for the Constitution and human rights.

ECONOMY

    In recent days the elimination of exemptions from the Value Added Tax (IVA) on agricultural and livestock products has become a source of social conflict, of disproportionate increases in the prices of foodstuffs and the occasion for questioning of economic measures that business grouped together in associations such as the National Association of Private Enterprise (ANEP), the Agricultural and Livestock Chamber of Commerce (CAMAGRO) have raised with regard to whether, the elimination of IVA exemptions will benefit the agricultural and livestock sector and, contrary to what one might believe and whether the elimination of the exemptions, will not provoke greater increases in the prices of agricultural and livestock products. On the other hand, for the sellers of these products, the elimination of exemptions is a measure which will affect their sales owing to the fact that prices on products will increase, thereby obliging consumers to reduce their consumption.

    During the week of 5-9 June, sellers grouped together in the Committee of Wholesale Sellers of La Tiendona implemented measures which approximated a boycott of the buying and selling of imported vegetables and fruits. Their objective was to push the government to re-establish the IVA exemptions on fruits and vegetables and, at the same time, demonstrate that national producers are not able to supply the national market.

    Logically, these activities rapidly generated a supply of fruits and vegetables and a subsequent increase in prices which were much above the 13% of IVA which they had to incorporate; they were, nevertheless, not permanent. At the same time, they suggested governmental reactions which contributed in little or nothing to the solution of the lack of supply, such as the failed “legume and vegetable fair”, which aimed at offering national agricultural and livestock products but suffered from a lack of supply from the first day of its functioning.

    Beyond the protests of the sellers, who threatened to take new measures in order to apply pressure, this situation called attention to the negative aspects of the governmental decision to eliminate IVA exemptions, which has affected not only fruits and vegetables, but also agricultural, livestock and pharmaceutical products. Protests by the fruit and vegetable sellers only partially reflect a the situation after the elimination of the IVA exemptions. Three important aspects exist for sustainable development which is seen as part of the current state of affairs and which is worth highlighting: lessened capacity for incidence on the part of wholesale sectors (workers and peasants), the inflationary effects (both direct and indirect) of the elimination of the IVA exemptions and the national agricultural and livestock producers’ lack of capacity to supply the national market.

    Curiously enough, it has been neither the consumers nor the working-class sectors who have demonstrated against the payment of IVA on the purchase of foodstuffs and pharmaceutical products, in spite of the fact that these sectors —being the most affected— ought to be the first to react. The sellers have been, moreover, the only ones who have shown their lack of agreement with the measure. This dynamic suggests that, for the moment, the sectors of the country engaged in wholesale merchandising are either not very interested in the imposition of the new taxes —and the political economy in general— or they cannot count on sufficient organization to take actions which might influence the situation and which make their position clear as they confront the specific problem —or both things at the same time.

    The prices of basic grains and foodstuffs will also be subject to an increase which , in theory, ought to be equivalent to the 13% of the IVA tax and which ought to be paid by the consumer. Nevertheless, it is true that the mere announcement of the application of IVA has already had a notable direct and indirect impact on prices: prices of the products have increased because of the application of IVA and, moreover, because of the boycott of the sellers of La Tiendona. According to data provided by the General Direction of Statistics and Census (DIGESTYC) for the month of May, inflation has increased up to 0.6%, principally as a result of the increase in the category of vegetables and greens, the prices of which increased up to 11.8%. It should be noted that this data does not yet reflect the indirect effects resulting from the insufficient supply of fruits and vegetables occurring during the second week of June, which provoked a situation such that during that week prices of these products increased up to 50%-100%.

    On the other hand, on the question of the incapacity of domestic production to supply the market, it is important to take note of the fact that technical-productive assistance for the agricultural and livestock sector has been one of the areas most neglected by public administration, first of all because they have not dedicated their scarce efforts at research and transference of technology to the categories which could supply the internal market for foodstuffs and, secondly, because the macroeconomic context has been unfavorable for non-exportable agricultural production practically since the decade of the 1970’s.

    Since its creation, the National Center for Agricultural and livestock Technology (CENTA) focussed its efforts principally on the creation of conditions for the betterment of productivity in the area of traditional export products such as coffee, cotton and sugar cane while basic grain crops, greens, legumes and fruits were not supported on the same basis, provoking, thereby, a deepening of the dependence on the importation of foodstuffs.

    At the same time, economic policy and public investment undertook to shape the context in which it is more convenient to import foodstuffs than to produce them nationally: the reduction of taxes on imported foodstuffs, the increase in taxes on fertilizers and other products needed by growers, price controls, the construction of highways which connect with neighboring producer countries and the abandonment of the productive infrastructure and national transport, are some elements which might be added to the obstacles to the development of the agricultural and livestock sector.

    The proposal of the current government aims to break with the anti-agricultural bias of the public policies by means such as tariff increases on agricultural and livestock products, an increase in investment in infrastructure in the agricultural and livestock sector, the elimination of exemptions from IVA and the creation of lines of credit for the coffee-growing sector. However, declarations of good intentions are not sufficient and in practice the strategy assumed by the government is incoherent in that it seeks to favor producers of foodstuffs by eliminating the exemptions from IVA, but creates a line of credit especially which favors the coffee producers. On the other hand, customs are increased on agricultural and livestock products but there is no adoption of a policy to increase domestic production of these products by means of massive programs of technological transference and, in general, of technical and productive assistance.

    In summary, the current situation suggests that, given the disorganization in the popular worker and peasant movements, the government seems to be in a position to implement whatever measure it feels is convenient, even when such a measure would affect the income of the most unprotected sectors and without this necessarily translating into benefits for the majority of farmers nor into any reaction by the agricultural sector. Even so, it is completely necessary to make these economic policy measures coherent because —as they are now presented— they only provide isolated and even contradictory effects on the economy as a whole.

SOCIETY

    At first in an erratic way, and now in an excessively rigid way, the communications policies employed by President Francisco Flores have given much food for thought during the first year he has been in office. As in other areas of government, Flores aimed to start a new way of leading public affairs from the standpoint of communications, multiplying functions and incorporating new ideas in the unsteady structure of the Secretary for Communications of the Presidency (SECOP). For a start, he announced the creation of a special figure, copied from the developed countries communications structures: a presidential spokesperson. He even said he was willing to reproduce, from the presidential office, the same mechanism which was so advantageous during the electoral campaign and promised to provide governmental leadership by being close to the people, never turning his ear away from what the population wanted to tell him. So it is that Flores presented his presidency as a flowering of infinite intentions —which, given the benefit of the doubt, would be seen as that: intentions— but which, one year later after he announced them, are nothing more than words.

    All in all, the awkwardness which his communication strategy suffered at the beginning of his presidential administration, the media, at the present time, praised the way in which the president and his team knew how to “sell” his message and his work to the population. In the shadow of a strengthened publicity strategy which is not concentrated in the presidential office and some autonomous figures, but rather also included various ministries, a government team which Flores had meant to deal with the complaints which constantly appear with respect to his absence from national life. But, is this excess of publicity truly what the president offered when he was sworn in as president? Is this really the kind of communications strategy which ought to emanate from the President of the Republic? At this precise moment in time, in which Flores has deal with the criticism he wanted to deal with, it is necessary —even urgently necessary— to evaluate that communications policy which he and his heads of press and secretariats have spoke so much about.

    A little after having completed his first three months as president, Flores received severe criticisms from various parts of the national media for reproducing the mechanisms of isolation characteristic of the previous president, Armando Calderón Sol. He literally fled from the press during his first encounter which he held with the deputies of the party. His declarations on topics of national relevance were scarce and thin. To the public eye, Flores began to become a skittish president, fearful of public questioning and scarcely prepared to deal with the tumultuous legacy of his predecessor. The famous spokesperson appeared on two occasions before the media, appearances which could well have been taken care of by an official memorandum. The InterAmerican Press Society, during its General Assembly in October of 1999, echoed the criticisms of the president in denouncing the evident intention to manipulate information and the same participation by journalists in the few press conferences Flores deigned to offer. For the InterAmerican Press Society, Flores had been the leading protagonist of the “100 days of silence” in the country.

    From this unfortunate presentation followed the removal —by common accord, according to their statements— of the spokesperson and the re-composition of the “presidential communications system”. What was wanted was that the president should speak in his own voice and give space to all of the national communications media. His weekly message and the interviews conceded to the most unconditional press occupied a good part of this revamped strategy. During the elections, state publicity, under the slogan “The Presidency of Francisco Flores”, attempted to provide a counterweight to the fall in electoral preferences suffered by the governmental party. And, once this stage passed, the publicity for the great works and big projects began to use up money in a permanent way, to the padded publicity shots of the presidential palace. The work of SECOP, of which many expected some kind of change for the good, began the backwater of publicists.

    Doubtless, Flores left gaping holes during his experience as communications secretary for Calderón Sol. Basically because in El Salvador, where important decisions continue to be taken behind the back of public opinion, to aim to reduce the work of communications of the presidency to big media events is to condemn any failure at coming close to the people, as he said he would. Flores and his communications team ought to understand that from the mere publishing of information always raises an answer, be it positive or negative, but which must always be taken into account. Nothing seems to indicate that the president will renounce his ambition to submit to the media and the population of the country his own vision of national reality. Far from this, rigidity has set in obliges his press advisors continually to cut off the most urgent public questioning —as occurred in the press conference of last June 13.

    ARENA’s millionaire propaganda campaign launched during the legislative and municipal elections demonstrated that mere publicity —simplifying and constructing electoral “stars”— is not sufficient to persuade the population to accept a politically determined offering. Nevertheless, the president makes an effort to push forward a publicity strategy in which bridges, highways and eloquent speeches contain a determinate message: “this is enough to be president, this is enough for me to win your approval”. Definitively speaking, the qualifying adjective “communication” which Flores and his press team attribute to themselves is a rather large epithet, in that he dedicates himself to the mere publishing of information which is filtered and cosmetic. Where was the pretense to get close to the people? Where was the attitude of listening, the desire to work together promised during the campaign?

    Publishing is not all there is to the field of communications. For the president to receive the message offered by public opinion on a daily basis, it would be more adequate to think along the lines of strengthening the formal mechanisms of contact with the diverse sectors of the population. The Flores administration has accommodated itself in a facile way to the traditional “no” of the ARENA administrations to the possibility of opening new channels of expression to the sectorial demands. At the present time, he who has sufficient means to make his opinion heard is listened to. In this category are bankers, industrialists, big farmers and personalities who have space reserved on the agenda for the media. On the sidelines are those who have to use protests and work stoppages to get the press and media, who are the object of name calling by public functionaries and more organic informative media (“those who burn tires”, “the anti-system opposition”, etc.).

    All in all, Flores must open up his presidency to the complaints —which grow by the day— of all sectors of the population which, by commission or omission, do not see in the presidents policies any which lead to their well-being. For this reason, the president and his committee of leaders and strategists of SECOP ought to understand that for the government to communicate better about its work, it ought to take up the principle of reciprocity in the exchange of opinions. And even more, that reciprocity ought not be let itself be manipulated by the blind desire to make it seem that the administration of the national government is simply “going well”. From this attitude comes favoritism and exclusion, already typical in the way Flores and his functionaries proceed. The image of good government cannot survive much longer as merely pure image. Above all when we find evident contradictions of all kinds and the gap between word and deed. This is to say that when the new communications policies are spoken of and dialogue with those who do not belong to the political class does not take place and when a marked difference is established between those who express acceptable criticism and those who do not and, above all, when the population is submitted to measures which in no way favor their quality of life.