CICIG making other countries scared or jealous?
David Agren writes that The Corruption Crackdown in Guatemala Is Making Mexico Jealous in Vice News.
CICIG's existence and continuation is jointly agreed upon by the Government of Guatemala and the United Nations. Almost all of CICIG's operations, maybe all of them, are paid for by the international community. In that sense, there's no real sovereignty issue. However, I can understand some frustration that people have with the UN and US pressuring Otto Perez Molina to extend its mandate after Perez Molina made it clear that he no longer wanted CICIG in the country. Biden and the US Embassy made the US position clear.
While I see CICIG's presence as largely positive, there is something to the fact that it violates Guatemala's sovereignty. Guatemalans should have the choice to not have a functioning judicial system I guess.
The MP's office and CICIG have both produced reports that impunity has decreased from approximately 98% to 70-75% during their collaboration. That's mostly based on prosecutions of homicide. I would look at WOLA's detailed report for more ammunition.
CICIG was not as effective under Dall'Anese as it should have been and its prosecutions have not always led to convictions, but that is the price that it pays for operating within a corrupt system in order to change it. For example, Portillo seems to have been guilty as charged. However, he was acquitted in Guatemala before being extradited to the US where he pleaded guilty. That might feed into feelings that CICIG only worked when its mandate was about to end. Looking at the WOLA report, however, one sees that is clearly not the case.
I thought CICIG's success would effect prosecutions in Honduras and El Salvador even if those countries did not adopt international commissions. I mentioned a little about that in a post the other day. The threats of international commissions and the protests in the street are going to cause those countries to demonstrate that they don't need international commissions. The Honduran government is trying to create a domestic commission to satisfy the public's appetite.
The same might happen in Mexico. Mexicans are discussing the possibility of such a commission. The potential success of the independent commission investigating the disappearance of the 43 students might also pressure the Mexican government to accept additional help. A CICIG-type institution isn't the only international assistance available.
Guatemala seldom makes the news in Mexico, where the population largely looks at Central America with a sense of suspicion and superiority — if it looks at all.
Then Guatemalans took to the streets in steady protests over the spring and summer, impeached their president, and imprisoned him on corruption charges. And Mexico started paying attention.
The sight of Guatemalans protesting corruption and pushing President Otto Pérez Molina out of power and into a prison cell has provoked envy in Mexico, where impunity is rife and top politicians are seen as untouchable. The popularity of President Enrique Peña Nieto has plunged over corruption and conflict of interest scandals, and the clumsy handling of the government's investigation into the case of the 43 missing students.
"If a country with deficiencies as abysmal as Guatemala in matters of justice [...] can do this, what's impeding Mexicans from aspiring some day to have a clean-up that starts at the top?" wrote columnist Jorge Zepeda Patterson in the online publication Sin Embargo. "If Guatemala could, why are we not going to do this ourselves?"David had asked my thoughts on CICIG, sovereignty, and the model's ability to transfer across countries. Here's some of what I argued.
CICIG's existence and continuation is jointly agreed upon by the Government of Guatemala and the United Nations. Almost all of CICIG's operations, maybe all of them, are paid for by the international community. In that sense, there's no real sovereignty issue. However, I can understand some frustration that people have with the UN and US pressuring Otto Perez Molina to extend its mandate after Perez Molina made it clear that he no longer wanted CICIG in the country. Biden and the US Embassy made the US position clear.
While I see CICIG's presence as largely positive, there is something to the fact that it violates Guatemala's sovereignty. Guatemalans should have the choice to not have a functioning judicial system I guess.
The MP's office and CICIG have both produced reports that impunity has decreased from approximately 98% to 70-75% during their collaboration. That's mostly based on prosecutions of homicide. I would look at WOLA's detailed report for more ammunition.
CICIG was not as effective under Dall'Anese as it should have been and its prosecutions have not always led to convictions, but that is the price that it pays for operating within a corrupt system in order to change it. For example, Portillo seems to have been guilty as charged. However, he was acquitted in Guatemala before being extradited to the US where he pleaded guilty. That might feed into feelings that CICIG only worked when its mandate was about to end. Looking at the WOLA report, however, one sees that is clearly not the case.
I thought CICIG's success would effect prosecutions in Honduras and El Salvador even if those countries did not adopt international commissions. I mentioned a little about that in a post the other day. The threats of international commissions and the protests in the street are going to cause those countries to demonstrate that they don't need international commissions. The Honduran government is trying to create a domestic commission to satisfy the public's appetite.
The same might happen in Mexico. Mexicans are discussing the possibility of such a commission. The potential success of the independent commission investigating the disappearance of the 43 students might also pressure the Mexican government to accept additional help. A CICIG-type institution isn't the only international assistance available.
Post a Comment