Peru Election 2006

The archived version

Transparencia and IDEA Forum on Electoral Broadcasting and Access to the Media

without comments

Maxwell A. Cameron
March 3, 2006

A working breakfast on “Public Electoral Broadcasting and Access to the Media” was held on Thursday, March 1, 2006, 8:00-9:30 am, sponsored by Transparencia and IDEA. This rapporteur’s report summarizes some of the key issues and conclusions to emerge from the discussion. Participants holding public office (see list below) spoke on a not-for-attribution basis.
IMG_1241.jpg
Photo: J. Bazo
Access to the media for political candidates has dramatically improved since 2000. Under the government of Alberto Fujimori, much of the mass media—especially network television and the popular press—was corrupted. Voters today have a better chance of getting the accurate and diverse sources of information and opinion they need to cast their ballots than they did under the previous regime.
Under Peru’s 2003 Law of Political Parties, all registered political candidates are guaranteed free airtime on both private and public television. This system is called the “franja electoral”—the electoral strip. According to Fernando Tuesta, the franja electoral is an offspring of the 2000 transition; it emerged from the OAS-sponsored dialogue round tables. According to the law, “from 30 days to two days prior to the general elections, political parties have free access, as established in this law, to the media of radio broadcasting and television, of private property or the state, in an electoral strip” (Article 37, Ley 28094: Ley de Partidos Politicos). The idea was to counter the power of money: unless all candidates were given publicly subsidized time on television, the broadcast media would be monopolized by candidates with deep pockets.
IMG_1249.jpg
Fernando Tuesta and Percy Medina
Photo: J. Bazo
The Law of Political Parties did not, however, adequately address a key problem: how should the franja electoral be financed? It is not in the spirit of the law for the franja electoral to be a lucrative business for television stations. Informing the public is part of the responsibility of the media as publicly chartered and regulated bodies. When the law was being made, however, there was an energetic lobbying effort by the media, as a result of which the law indicates: “The state will compensate the communications media by means of a proportional reduction in the payment of the toll for the use of the radio-electric and electromagnetic spectrum.” In practice, the media have profited from the franja electoral by charging high rates.
Television stations have established rates that they charge for airtime, but these can often be negotiated. The Peruvian government has little capacity to negotiate with the media over the rates the public must pay for the franja electoral, however, especially in the middle of an election campaign. Whereas the government is obliged by the law to provide broadcasting time to the parties, the media are not obliged to accept a particular rate.
The electoral authorities are already running against the clock. It will be impossible to have the franja electoral ready before about March 17 or 18, at least on network television (Channel 7, owned by the state, has already begun the franja electoral). The reasons for this delay have to do with administrative procedures. For one thing, the funding is not yet in place. A permanent commission in the congress is considering the funding issue. There is a proposal to authorize the use of S/. 20 million that was initially appropriated for the electronic voting system prior to its cancellation. [This has been approved. See update here]. This will probably be reallocated to pay for the franja electoral. The delay could cause disagreements among political candidates over what to do in the week in mid-March when the franja is not in operation.
The franja electoral is, in part, designed to ensure a minimum level of equity in media coverage, and to allow the candidates to say more about their proposals than is possible in brief spots. Taylor Boas noted that the typical 30 second spot does not give candidates enough time to convey much of substance, whereas the franja electoral enables them to develop their proposals in greater depth.
According to Percy Medina, research by Transparencia has found that the media has inadequately performed it responsibility to provide crucial information to voters. Only about 8 percent of the coverage of the election in 54 newspapers throughout Peru between January 10 and February 10 dealt with the candidates’ plans for government.
The media have also been criticized by some of the candidates for not providing equitable coverage to all candidates. With 22 presidential candidates and nearly 3,000 candidates running for congress, the media can hardly be expected to provide equal coverage to all contenders. Moreover, the news media in Peru have always had political biases, as do news organizations everywhere. The media cannot afford to ignore their bottom line, which is closely connected to ratings.
That said, as Luis Nunes stressed, there is, with notable exceptions, a lack of balance in television news coverage. Some daily newspapers do not openly endorse candidates, but provide them with protective shields. In the long run, public trust in the media might be reinforced by a clearer separation between the opinions of the owners of the media and the content of news reporting.
IMG_1236.jpg
Luis Nunes
Photo: J. Bazo
Participants:
Engelbert Barreto Huamán, JNE
Fabiola Bazo, “Peru Election 2006”
Jorge Bazo, “Peru Election 2006”
Taylor Boas, University of California
Luz María Correa, Canadian Embassy
Maxwell A. Cameron, University of British Columbia
Alfonso Chan, ONPE
Percy Medina, Transparencia
Luis Nunes Bertoldo, NDI
Luis C. Seghelmeble Riera, RENIEC
Fernando Tuesta, La Universidad Católica del Perú


Franja tendrá S/. 20 mllns.
Peru21
3 de marzo de 2006, p. 7.

Por fin tienen luz verde. El Pleno del Congreso autorizó el uso de 20 millones de soles del presupuesto de la Oficina Nacional de Procesos Electorales (ONPE) para la implementación de la franja electoral en los medios de comunicación privados, la misma que, según la ley, debe empezar a emitirse a partir del 10 de marzo.
No obstante ello, la ONPE advirtió que esta fecha podría aplazarse debido a que, tras la promulgación de la norma, requieren unos siete días para tramitar la adquisición de los espacios en los medios privados. La jefa de este ente del sistema electoral, Magdalena Chú, reiteró la necesidad de que se conozcan las resoluciones definitivas de inscripción de las agrupaciones que participan en la contienda electoral para poder imprimir las cédulas de sufragio.
FINANCIAMIENTO. Por su parte, el gerente de Supervisión de Fondos Partidarios, Alfonso Chan León, informó que este 7 de marzo vence el plazo para que las organizaciones políticas presenten sus informes de ingresos de campaña.
Los partidos deberán presentar la relación de los aportes -en especies y en efectivo- que han hecho las personas naturales y jurídicas para financiar la campaña electoral, entre diciembre de 2005 y febrero de este año.
Chan explicó que en el informe también se deberán consignar las donaciones, las ganancias que hayan obtenido por intereses o ingresos financieros y por actividades proselitistas, y hasta las deudas en las que hayan incurrido para los gastos de campaña.

Written by Michael Ha

March 3rd, 2006 at 2:56 pm

Posted in Analysis & Opinion

Spam prevention powered by Akismet