Proceso 913
August 8, 2000
ISSN 0259–9864
 
 
 

INDEX

Editorial The “advisor” to the deputies of the Legislative Assembly
Politics The national press and national interests
Society Another 100 days for Héctor Silva
 
 
 

EDITORIAL

    Before August vacations ended this week, the principal news media published the story concerning the case of the “advisors” contracted by deputies of the Legislative Assembly. Absurd matters suddenly came to light on the pages of the press and in the media, such as the fact that several such advisors were taking classes at universities, that, in general, these advisors were close relatives of the deputies in question, that the job descriptions of the said advisors were not clearly defined...So, the media placed in evidence another of the many vices of Salvadoran legislative deputies. This time it was nepotism. There is no doubt that it was good business for the news media printing the story of “private vices, public virtues”. And this because what was behind the interest of the media in these particular practices on the part of the deputies—i.e., that of hiring nephews, nieces, cousins and godsons—was not concern for the public good, but an interest in getting back at them for the obstacles placed in the way of the press and journalists in the salon where the Legislative Assembly meets.

    Had these obstacles not existed, it is probable that the media would not have caused such a to-do about a practice which, when all is said and done, is not a recent one and about which the media ought to have known about long before making it public. There is no doubt that the news media, in their reports on the prevailing nepotism in the Legislative Assembly, has provided a service to society. But from this it does not follow that the contribution to the public good had been the fundamental motivating element in the acute and minute interest shown in the case. It would be a serious error to think this, given that they could suggest an identification with the interests of the big media businesses with the interests of society, which has not been the case in the past nor is it now.

    In El Salvador, the big news media go after their own interests: to obtain millionaire profits in the realm of publicity and to influence governmental decisions with the objective of backing specific economic interests. The generation of information which could contribute to the creation of critical and conscious public opinion concerning their rights is somewhat secondary and subordinate to the two objectives taken note of here. The interests of majority sectors of the society go in the opposite direction—i.e., a daily concern for subsistence in a hostile environment characterized by insecurity, poverty and violence. The agenda of the people is one thing while the agenda of the big news media is another. The intrigues of the media consist in making their public believe that their informative agenda is the same as that of society in general, with which they end up becoming leaders of the national dynamic and imposing their vision not only of what is important and of what is convenient and timely to discuss, but also what cannot (or does not merit) being discussed publicly. Things being as they are, it is clear that with the media one must walk on eggshells, be critically suspicious of what they say, when they say it and how they say it as well as taking note of what they do not say or leave in silence. One should also be clear about the fact that social problems which overflow the limit (and the filter) offered by the media for their expression.

    Returning, then, to the case of the “advisors” of the legislative assembly deputies, the media undoubtedly performed an important service to society—or so it was said. Nevertheless, it is important to insist upon some aspects of the situation that have not been sufficiently examined. One of the first things that should be said is that, in principle, what they did is not a bad thing—nor is it something evil that the deputies who have advisors who help them in their functions, nor that these same might be hired and paid for with public funds. One should not lose sight of the fact that, to the delicate nature of the decisions which they must take, is added the notorious lack of capacity and capability exhibited by a good majority of them. Some competent advisors can help the deputies sort out not only the intrinsic difficulties wrapped up in a topic about which the deputy must make a decision, but also those which rise from their own personal limitations. And this can translate into decisions which are more will founded and less costly for the citizens.

    So now, if the advisors are hired and paid with state funds, they themselves become public servants—which is to say, servants of the citizenry and not personal employees of this or that deputy (or of this or that party). Additionally, in order to be able to contract some advisor, not only should some basic professional requirements be complied with—that they have the technical and academic capabilities to hold the position—but that any citizen ought to be able to hold the position as advisor, if they in fact have the necessary merits. The deputies have flagrantly violated the conditions outlined: not only did they hire incompetent people with public funds, but they also closed off the possibility that other citizens with the capabilities and training required might occupy the post.

    Some deputies have defended the intellectual capacity of their advisors. Perhaps they do indeed have these capacities. But they should have been measured against the capacities of other citizens opting for such posts. This they did not do. Other deputies adduced that they had contracted people of “confidence”, which is another way of saying that these have the mission to watch or cover their backs as if the function of the advisors, in their capacity as public servants, were to protect the deputies and not help them to do a better job. From the public interest, what is least convincing is that advisors were hired under the pretext of being persons who inspired confidence in the deputies because this would mean that society is paying determinate employees to cover up corruption, intrigues and dirty work of the deputies. What would have been most convenient would have been a few competent, critical advisors committed to the public good and with sufficient ethical backbone not to lend themselves to some of the deputies’ dirty games.

    Can the deputies surround themselves with people of confidence, relatives and friends? Of course they can. But they ought to do so outside the legislative halls because public buildings are workplaces, not homes for the employees who work there—and the deputies are—although, from time to time, one forgets that this is so—public employees. Can they hire people to watch their backs? Of course they can—any one can. But such people should be hired outside the doors of the legislative Assembly and, obviously, the salaries should be paid by the person in question (or the party) because we are dealing here with people the deputy should hire with his or her own private funds.

POLITICS

    The national press plays a very important role in present day El Salvador and deserves to be the subject of profound reflection in order to determine the depth and breadth of the influence of journalists in the daily life of the country. In this respect it might be useful to take into account some essential points which define the presence and influence of the press in national reality. In the first place, in a post-war society, the communications media seem to be called upon to play a role of primary importance in favor of the democratization of the public institutions and help society in its slow and difficult road towards reconciliation.

    On the other hand, it is a widely accepted fact that a society which is democratic, encourages respect for law and the diversity of opinions. In this measure, democratic society demands a press committed with democratic values in a symbiosis where the values of the society are assumed, protected and questioned—and at the same time, respected—by professional people specializing in communications. In this way, the press is a reflection and expression of the values which a society assumes, at the same time as it criticizes the inconsistencies it observes. But are these actors so central to society conscious of the vanguard role which the national press ought to carry out in the defense and protection of the democratic principles which the country needs today?

    If one were to judge by the declarations and positions taken arising from the ambience surrounding the discussion of the role of the communications media in democratic El Salvador in the process of construction, one could easily agree to the supposition that diverse social actors are conscious of this new role to be played by the press. In fact, no politician would accept the idea of restricting the work of communications specialists; to the contrary, they tend to have a good relationship with the press. For their part, the populace recognizes and supports this new reality. It is quite common to hear denunciations of all kinds in the news media.

    Journalists, meanwhile, are conscious of their influence in national life. Diverse reactions to the latest decisions by the Legislative Assembly to restrict access for journalists to legislative debates indicate that this is so—which, according to sources within the Assembly, might have as their objective guaranteeing “objectivity and preventing false news”. In this context, politicians have been questioned as to their transparency; in fact, this constitutes a small sampling of how state institutions function to the degree of ease with which the desired information can be obtained. La Prensa Gráfica published a small sampling on consultation for information in diverse state dependencies. In all cases, it has been proven that there is a reticence to permit access to information. In this way, diverse news articles have been published about how public matters are being handled and the hostile attitude of state functionaries, who systematically block access to information.

    This last matter illustrates perfectly the difference between reality and the discourse of different actors in national life. The principal written press and televised news have dealt extensively with the topic and have expressed their rejection of what they consider to be arrogance and backsliding in the processes of democratization in El Salvador. Some media have insisted that the blockage of information by state functionaries makes necessary legislation which is on a par with that of other countries—legislation which respects and guarantees the right to information and the obligatory requirement to open up public institutions to the scrutiny of journalists and other communications specialists.

    The foregoing argument is based upon the idea that the press is the organ which serves as a monitor for the people. By means of free access to information, not only is the freedom of the press and communication guaranteed—these being freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic—, but that the work of functionaries can be monitored as well, including the way they administer the taxpayers’ money. In this sense, the press is seen as the defender of the freedom of expression and of the interests of the people as they face and deal with the corruption which is habitual in the state bureaucracy. Definitively speaking, the press ought to be seen as the bulwark of democracy and one of the most effective of those who fight corruption. All of which means that their contribution is irreplaceable if abuses of power and authority are desired.

    Nevertheless, in this ambience, no one questions the professionalism of national journalists, and even less do they question the democratization of the media and the interests they defend. As a consequence, ineluctable questions must be asked: Who controls the media? Does the agenda of the media coincide with the agenda of the people? What interests does the media defend? In general, these are the questions upon which journalists do not tend to meditate. Even worse, when their professionalism, ethics and commitment to truth in dealing with the news are questioned, they close ranks in order to avoid any questioning whatsoever. In this sense, if the importance of free access to information cannot be denied—because it is imperative that public functionaries allow themselves to be monitored and scrutinized—, the media cannot hide from and avoid monitoring by the people themselves. On too many occasions, the press and media present scenarios upholding interests which are in no way committed to the cause of democracy. Misinformation, half-truths and yellow journalism are some examples of the recurring lacks and faults of which a good number of the nation news media are guilty.

    On the other hand, the lack of professional ethics and the openness with which some national media deal with the topics which are most relevant to the country suggest the serious nature of the problem and how far there is to go in preventing the abuses which currently characterize some news media and journalists. In many cases their partiality is too much in evidence. Many times the dignity of persons is not even in evidence, and much less so if they are suspected of some crime. In fact, in the editorial of this number of PROCESO the hypocrisy with which the media has dealt with the topic of nepotism in the Legislative Assembly is pointed out. If it were not for the fact that access to information at a particular point in time had been denied them, they probably would not have insisted so much on the problem.

    Finally, reality shows that the big news media continue providing important services to the powers that be: this is to say, to big national businessmen. In this sense, their treatment of the news continues to be influenced by the preference and linkage of their owners to the groups in economic power. For example, the total silence of the big news media on the celebration of the twentieth anniversary of the assassination of Monseñor Romero is noteworthy. Moreover, to pass lightly over the diverse religious, cultural and political demonstrations held during this same celebration—and which mobilized a significant portion of the Salvadoran population—some media assigned themselves the task of casting aspersions on this widely known historical event and even presenting a species of misinformation with regard to it. This makes manifest the fact that the agenda and interests which the big news media defend do not necessarily coincide with the interests of the population. While Salvadoran society is interested in participation, reconciliation and social and economic democracy, the media which most influences national opinion defend the interests of big capital, without paying attention to social and economic injustice which they cause or the anti-democratic values which they embody.

SOCIETY

    On August 10 the municipal administration of Héctor Silva and his partially renewed Municipal Council will complete 100 more days in office. After defeating their opponents by a good margin of votes in last March’s elections, the mayor’s intentions were, as he then declared, to familiarize himself with the work carried out during the time which he dedicated to his campaign and prepare the succession of council members who accompanied him during the three previous years. For this reason, the first days of the new administration ought not to present any major problems. It was enough to set in motion the plans drawn up, complete those which were already in motion and work in order to remove the dust raised against the transparency and professionalism of the previous municipal team. The period of 100 days was not such a distant goal and the road which it would follow in order to reach it was practically opened up by the previous experience which Silva brought with him to the job.

    Nevertheless, and in spite of the fact that the convulsed atmosphere of the elections almost broke down after learning of the results of the elections, there were still some points pending for the Silva administration which, in the long run, could become obstacles for his administration. Where are these possible obstacles to be found. The answer is that they are not to be found precisely in the political adversaries who survived the elections. Speaking in general terms, the participation of the rest of the candidates did not imply any serious obstacle, not solely for the low level of attractiveness which they called forth among the capital city voters, but because their campaign promises could not compete with the lines of action presented by Silva and his team during their first three years of work. Even his closest rival, ARENA party member Luis Cardenal, had to reconsider the big topics which, thanks to the Silva administration, had become obligatory terms of reference in order to determine the degree to which these political proposals had to come to terms with the big problems facing the city.

    In any case, these demands in the context of the campaign did not end with the elections. A few weeks after having assumed office, Silva and his new council presented to the capital city residents a new municipal government plan in which many of the elements which they were unable to deal with during the campaign were taken up, or dealt with in a deeper, more serious way. For this reason the necessity was taken up, in this government plan, of making the municipality an area in which multiple development centers might coexist so that all might have recourse to the district divisions begun in November 1998 might be. Moreover, appropriate attention to the problem of urban transportation was taken up along with the need for improving the drainage network, both of which topics were practically nonexistent in the original proposal. Some of these points were dealt with by Silva’s opponents during the electoral campaign; Cardenal, for example, spoke of “development poles”. But the fundamental offering in the refinement of the municipal proposal by Silva is perhaps owing more to the discussions which added a great deal on the question of urban problems which the current municipal administration had awakened, either because of the success or problems detected during the three previous years.

    In this way, and, at least at the beginning of his term in office, Silva and his team sent a very positive message to the inhabitants of San Salvador: that the solutions to their problems would not be only in the hands of municipal functionaries, but that they would have to have patience and a willingness to deal with the contributions of civil society in general. With this under his arm, Silva and his municipal council have advanced with relative tranquillity during these last 100 days in office. Fortunately, the Flores administration, although it has not offered the support hoped for, neither has Silva and his team had to deal with attacks or unfounded harassment. This state of affairs has allowed the new administration to give priority status to the continuity of the successes inherited from the preceding three-month period: the rescue and renovation of the historic downtown center, the policy of handling solid waste materials, the modernization of the administrative apparatus and a decentralization of the municipal work as well as work in the area of human resources. Given that the obstacles have been practically the same—attacks by a right-wing policy which did not hesitate to cause a fracas at every word uttered by the mayor—the challenge is not to lessen the pace of the work set up to now.

    And this is precisely one of the implications which the mayor ought not to lose sight of if he really intends to leave more than clean plazas and orderly streets to his successors. There still exist various aspects in which the municipality has not been able to move from proposals to concrete acts. The much publicized policy of citizen participation in which the previous council worked has not produced the desired results, simply because many of the mechanisms considered to be important for its being set in motion have not even been begun. A well-defined strategy does not even exist which today would permit the visualization of municipal districts as true promoters of local development. The same happens with the plans for purifying the contaminated air of the capital city, for procuring a situation in which the municipality might procure financial self-sustainability and rehabilitate critical areas such as depressed neighborhoods in the marginalized areas. In all of these cases, practice does not correspond to preliminary plans which the municipal authorities have set up, in spite of the fact that these offer quite a lot.

    On the other hand, Silva and his team ought to work to resolve a very important aspect if they wish to take full advantage of his influence in the life of the municipality, and this is: the necessity to define and differentiate between the attributions which are the responsibility of the mayor’s office and those which are the responsibility of the other public entities. It could be that, for now, municipal authorities are doing well to deal with the problems such as public security and the ordering of urban transit. The fact is that that relative success is owing, in good measure, to the fact that legal ambiguities exist which permit them to act together with other institutions in dealing with diverse problems affecting the capital. This situation does not prevent the possibility that at some moment in time Silva might have to deal with problems, the dimensions of which exceed his capabilities and resources as mayor. Should this come to pass, it is probable that the mayor and his team might have to face real failures in the planning of their objectives in the medium and short range.

    Finally, the most recent conflicts occurring inside the FMLN merit special attention, the FMLN being one of the political parties which has offered the most support to the mayor during his recent years of political practice. Raul Mijango, a leader of that left party, has begun his “private battle” to obtain the status of mayoral candidate for San Salvador during the 2003 elections. While this does not affect either the image or the work of Silva for the moment, what is definitely true is that Mijango’s maneuver must be seen as part and parcel of the constant internal power struggles in the FMLN. One would have to ask, up to what point could these internal struggles lead to a waning of support for Silva—which at the present time is almost unconditional—by all tendencies of the FMLN? What must be determined is how the self-proposed candidacy of Mijango might influence the inevitable search for a substitute for the charismatic figure of Silva within the rank and file of the party. Meanwhile, the mayor and his team ought to concern themselves with continuing to distance themselves as much as possible from all of those situations in which political interests are more in question than the transparent administration of the life of San Salvador.