Archive for the ‘Political Parties’ Category
Peru Posible y la Valla Electoral
The Independent (UK) on Ollanta Humala
La Republica on Votes Abroad
According to La Republica, of the estimated total of 260,000 votes abroad, 151,000 have been counted leaving 109,000 to go. If Flores wins 60 percent, or 65,000 votes, this will not be enough to close the gap with Garcia who currently leads with about 90,000 votes. There are, however, disputed returns from both Peru and abroad, though it is hard to know in advance how they will break.
Source: La Republica, 18 de abril de 2006, p. 2.
Lack of Seats in Congress Worries UN
According to Xavier Barrón, “The priority is Lourdes. All the rest is of no interest.” The legal spokesperson for UN knows that with fewer than 20 seats in Congress, the UN will have little power unless Flores wins the presidency. Indeed, Barrón threatens to fire anyone who distracts attention from the presidential race by trying to count preferential votes. The fact is, however, that the poor performance of UN outside of Lima is a source of some concern within UN ranks. Most of the projected 19 seats won are from Lima-Callao. APRA got the same percent of presidential votes, but double the number of seats in Congress.
Source: La República, 17 de abril del 2006
Candidates Without Votes
A report in El Comercio focuses on the losers in this election campaign. It lists congressional candidates from some of the smaller parties who have received as few as one or two preferential votes.
With 55 percent of the votes counted, one candidate did surprisingly well: from his prison cell in Piedras Gordas, and with little access to the media, Antauro Humala has won 14.605 votes.
Shadow of Fredemo
Alvaro Vargas Llosa speaks from personal experience when he says that 24 plus 24 does not equal 48. At least not in politics. In other words, there is no mathematical formula for calculating the votes in a second round election. Alvaro’s father, Mario Vargas Llosa, held a slim lead over Alberto Fujimori in the first round of the election in 1990. Yet he lost overwhelmingly in the second round in part because of a process of polarization that cast the leader of FREDEMO as a candidate of the establishment against an insurgent outsider.
For this reason, Vargas Llosa (hijo) says that Humala should not be underestimated as a second-round candidate. He notes that an alliance between APRA and UN is likely to play into Humala’s hands. These two parties may think they are closing ranks in defense of democracy, but many voters will see it as an example of collusion between members of the establishment against a newcomer. Vargas Llosa also makes another important observation: the Fujimoristas who voted for Keiko Fujimori in Lima (where Humala is weakest) may well pass over to Humala in round two.
The results of a second round are unpredictable. A second round campaign will have a dynamic all of its own, and campaigns matter especially in elections like this. In his regular column in Peru.21, Augusto Alvarez Rodrich makes a similar observation. He warns against the construction of a new FREDEMO.
Ollanta Humala Won a Majority in Madre Mía
Source: La Primera, 17 de abril del 2006
Ollanta Humala appears to have won an absolute majority of the vote in Madre Mia where he commanded a military base in 1992. According to Alfonso Adriánzen Mejía, UPP legal representative in that locality, the preliminary result vindicates Ollanta Humala against alleged human rights abuses.
Here is an idea for some entrepreneurial researcher or survey research firm: send a team to Madre Mia and conduct focus groups to nail down the reasons behind the vote.
Analysis of Lima Election Results
Carlos Meléndez Guerrero analyzes the performance of Lourdes Flores in the popular sector districts of Lima.
Andrés Oppenheimer Interviews Ollanta Humala
Ollanta Humala was interviewed on television by Andrés Oppenheimer. Oppenheimer has written an article on Humala in El Nuevo Heraldo, reproduced below.
Unidad Nacional se acerca gracias a votos del extranjero
Source: La República, 17 de abril del 2006
13 Parties Fail to Pass Threshold
As many as 13 parties may not pass the 4 percent electoral threshold necessary to win a seat on congress, including:
FIM
Justicia Nacional
Partido Socialista
Fuerza Democrática
Concertación Descentralista
Alianza para el Progreso
Con Fuerza Perú
Progresemos Perú
Reconstrucción Democrática
Resurgimiento Peruano
Perú Ahora
Movimiento Nueva Izquierda
The jury is still out on Peru Posible and Restauracion Nacional
APRA and UN Move Closer
Jorge del Castillo of the APRA and Xavier Barron of Unidad Nacional offered a message of calm to the public, saying both parties will wait for and respect the official results once announced. Both parties recognize that their interests are not served by attacking one another under the spotlight of publicity. A lengthy fight between the two rivals could undermine both and play to the advantage of Ollanta Humala, the two leaders said. The entente may be deeper. An eventual accord between the two parties seems feasible, although premature at this time. In addition to certain programmatic agreements, both sides have a common interest in closing ranks against Humala. This is also a risky strategy, since it casts APRA and UN as traditional parties trying to block an outsider.
Publicistas analizan fortalezas y debilidades de los candidatos
Peru’s New Congress and Alliance Politics (Updated, again)
Maxwell A. Cameron
April 13, 2006
According to fellow-blogger Rici (see comment below), the distribution of seats in Congress could look something like the following
UPP 42 (Ollanta Humala’s “borrowed” party)
APRA 38 (Alan Garcia’s party)
UN 17 (The alliance behind Lourdes Flores)
AF 13 (The Fujimorista coalition)
FC 5 (Frente de Centro, led by Valentin Paniagua)
PP 3 (Peru Posible, the ruling party)
The exact number of seats may vary, but there are five inescapable conclusions.
First, the governing party, Peru Posible, has been all but wiped out. From 45 seats it is down to 3.
Second, no party of the left has passed the 4 percent threshold necessary to hold a seat in congress.
Third, UN has the same representation as before: 17 seats. Moreover, in its haste to jump on the renovation bandwagon, it has lost its most effective legislators.
Fourth, UPP did better than many expected. Rather than third, as polls predicted, it has a plurality. Humala has coat-tails.
Fifth, APRA is the pivotal party. It is the only party that could govern by cutting alliances with left (UPP) or right (UPP), or by playing the two off against each other.
Sixth, the Fujimoristas have increased their share of seats from 3 to 13. They are a force to be reckoned with, and they will have one over-riding goal: to bring back Alberto Fujimori. One of the biggest vote winners is Fujimori’s daughter, Keiko (see profile in The Miami Herald). This makes one wonder what would have happened in this election had Alberto Fujimori been able to run.
The prospect of an alliance between UPP and AF follows naturally from the composition of the congress. Since the over-riding goal of the AF is to have the case against Fujimori dropped, they will ultimately have to deal with whoever is elected. They would probably have less negotiating power with an APRA government, which will have more alliance possibilities. A UPP-AF alliance would also benefit Humala by bringing him closer to a legislative majority–though the two groups do not quite have 60 seats between them–and thereby reduce dependence on APRA or other groups. Yet the idea of any sort of deal-making between the two sides provokes sharply negative reactions from within their respective camps.
Postscript: Matthew Shugart, who runs a very useful blog called Fruits and Votes, argues that alliances are of particular importance in Peru’s semi-presidential system. Congress has a special power in this system: it can censure (and thereby remove) the prime minister (head of cabinet) (see Articles 122, and 132 of the Constitution). For a penetrating analysis from one of the great experts on institutions in Latin America, read below under extended entry.
In the comments section below, Sasha asks a question that goes to the heart of a related institutional issue: what happens if the president does not have enough seats to form a majority in congress? Can the other parties get together and select a new executive? The short answer is: no, the executive is not dependent on the composition of congress, as in a parliamentary system. The other parties can form an alliance. In principle, if they have enough votes, they can impeach the president (but that is rare). A president who does not have a majority in congress will typically try to form alliances to pass legislation.
As Matt points out, the need for alliances is built into the system to some extent. I also tend to agree with Matt’s thoughts on Garcia: “Garcia would have far less ability to destroy the economy this time if he won (as I think he will, if he is in the runoff). Last time, his party had a majority in congress and was totally under his control. He was unchecked. This time he will have to build alliances.”
The next president will not have a majority (as Garcia did before), and will have to spend a fair amount of time building coalitions. Of course, there is another alternative: rule by decree, ignore the congress and constitution, bypass legislature and courts, and establish what Guillermo O’Donnell has called “delegative democracy.” That would be possible in the event of an Humala victory, especially given his stated interest in a constituent congress/assembly (see the astute analysis by Julio Carrion on this).
Transparencia Datos Electorales #9
Datos Electorales No. 9: Publicidad en televisión y radio. This report contains information about paid advertising in tv and radio by political parties and groups from February 10th to March 31st, 2006 Download file
Scenarios for Second Round II: Coalitions
Scenarios for Second Round
Impact of Election Results on the Political Landscape
El adios político de Fernando Olivera
Coverage of Alan García Activities on Election Day
Coverage of Ollanta Humala Activities on Election Day
Coverage of Lourdes Flores Activities on Election Day
APOYO Exit Poll (100%) Congressional Results
Source: Expreso, 10 de abril del 2006
Interview with Alan Garcia in La Tercera (Chile)
Financial Times Analysis of the Campaign
Rivals renew battle as Humala leads Peru field by Hal Weitzman in Lima and Editorial Comment: Humala’s warning
Alan Garcia & Lourdes Flores Close their Campaigns in Lima
Maxwell A. Cameron & Fabiola Bazo
Photos: M. Cameron & F. Bazo
April 6, 2006
Both Lourdes Flores and Alan Garcia closed their campaigns tonight, within a few city blocks of one another. Flores held her meeting in the Campo de Marte in the district of Jesus Maria, while Garcia closed his campaign in the same spot used by Ollanta Humala last night: in front of the Place of Justice in the city center.
Both meetings drew large crowds. It is easier to compare the size of the crowd that came for Garcia with the size of the crowd that assembled for Humala since they were held in exactly the same place. Our sense is they were comparable in size. Both were massive meetings. The APRA crowd was friendlier to outsiders than the Humala supporters. APRA draws support from a cross-section of the society, and it shows in the faces of those who gathered to hear Alan Garcia. There were many lumpen elements in the gathering of Humala’s supporters (a foreign journalist had his cell phone stolen and we almost lost a watch). The APRA crowd was remarkably disciplined and well behaved. They listened patiently and cheered enthusiastically while their leader spoke for a least two hours.
The contrast with Flores’ rally was striking. Flores’ meeting was colorful, up-beat, telegenic and full of razzmatazz. Every detail was carefully scripted. The security detail was organized and courteous, and the lights and colors were brilliant. The stage was positioned so that it looked out at a long street full of people; the media was placed behind the stage offering a view of Flores in a sea of supporters. The crowd seemed larger because it stretched way down the street, but it was not broad. One has the sense that Flores support is broader than it is deep, and the layout of the meeting seemed designed to convey depth of support at the expense of breadth.
Flores’ stage was like a cat-walk, allowing her to be close and surrounded by enthusiastic supporters. She spoke briefly and forcefully, and yet it is hard to remember exactly what she said. There were allusions to “Peru profundo” the “deep Peru” and promises to address the need for major changes. She spoke as a woman and of her commitment to the women of Peru. After the speech there was music, fireworks, confetti. Flores was joined on the stage by her congressional candidates. Flores’ supporters appeared to be considerably whiter and more well-to-do than the APRA crowd, and certainly more affluent than the Humala supporters.
The APRA rally appeared to be substantially larger, perhaps bigger than the Humala rally (which we estimated at 20,000).
Whereas Flores was brief and finished early, Garcia was speaking when we arrived and went on for close to two hours. And, whereas Flores spoke in general terms, clearly aimed at winning the widest possible support, Garcia’s speech was doctrinaire and policy-specific. One got the sense that he was aiming to mobilize core supporters and to make as many promises as possible to pull out specific groups of voters. He spoke of the plight of fishermen, students, teachers, members of the police force, pensioners, workers, miners, small businesses, and he had a promise for each group.
Whereas Humala’s closing rally yesterday emphasized his diagnosis of the problems facing Peru and some broad ideas for change, Garcia was full of specifics. He reserved harsh words for the government of Toledo, especially the management of the Camisea natural gas project. He was often funny and mordant.
Garcia struck characteristic poses on the podium, including resting with one elbow on the podium and the other on his hip, or reaching over the podium and looking down on the crowd like Haya de la Torre. The most intense moments of interaction with the crowd occurred when Garcia attacked the Palace of Justice, calling for a profound reform, or when he called for the death sentence for child molesters.
How much do these closing campaigns matter? It is hard to know. In a symposium in the Universidad del Pacifico, Alfredo Torres noted that in the last published APOYO poll Humala’s support had declined by two points, and this trend might well continue. There is probably great volatility in the electorate right now. The attacks on Humala in the press are relentless. They could have the effect of either undoing some of his support, or encouraging Humala supporters keep quiet—Torres spoke of a spiral of silence. The race may turnout to be closer than anyone imagined. In this context, the closing acts may have significance.
Cierre de Campaña de Alan García (APRA)
Source: El Comercio, 7 de abril del 2006
Cierre de Campaña de Lourdes Flores (UN)
Source: El Comercio, 7 de abril del 2006
Cierre de Campaña de Ollanta Humala (UPP) en Arequipa
Source: La República, 7 de abril del 2006. Foto: AP.
Cierre de Campaña de Valentín Paniagua (Frente de Centro)
Source: La República, 7 de abril del 2006. Foto: Yanina Patricio.
Cierre de Campaña de Susana Villarán (Concertación Descentralista) en Andahuaylas
Source: La República, 7 de abril del 2006. Foto: Rafael Cornejo
Cierre de Campaña de Javier Diez Canseco (Partido Socialista) en Puno
Source: La República, 7 de abril del 2006
Javier Diez Canseco, candidato presidencial por el Partido Socialista (PS), optó por cerrar su campaña con un mitin en Puno.
Dangerous Liaisons III: Ollanta Humala’s Relations with the Montesinos Mafia
Interview with Lourdes Flores
UPDATE: Ollanta Humala closes campaign in Lima
Maxwell A. Cameron & Fabiola Bazo
Photos: Jorge Bazo
April 5, 2006
UPDATE: We have added local and international media coverage and front pages of local newspapers.
Ollanta Humala closed his campaign in Lima tonight in a massive meeting in the Paseo de los Héroes Navales (in front of the Palace of Justice). In front of an enthusiastic crowd of at least 20,000, Humala hammered away at the themes that have dominated his campaign, using military references and metaphors throughout.
The evening began with singing of the nation anthem. Most people sang with their hands on their hearts. This tradition began with the military regime of General Juan Velasco Alvarado and has become fairly commonplace ever since.
Conspicuous among the crowd were reservists, and supporters of Ollanta’s brother Antauro.
After paying tribute to Victor Raul Haya de la Torres, Jose Carlos Mariategui and Jorge Basadre, Humala said the status quo cannot continue. He called for a more solidary society without exclusion. Humala lamented that conditions are so bad that many young people wish to leave the country. He reiterated his call for contracts with foreign enterprises to be renegotiated. At the same time he insisted that he will respect private property. Firms that pay taxes and royalties and don’t hurt the environment will be welcome in Peru.
Humala claimed that his party is the only one that acknowledges the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and requested reparation for communities that were silent witnesses to the violence.
The speech had a strongly defensive tone as well, which suggests Humala is smarting from attacks by his adversaries. He said his adversaries are trying to link Humala to the “bad Montesinos” in order to delink Montesinos with Fujimori. In fact, said Humala, Fujimori and Montesinos were Siamese twins. “Enough of this campaign of fear,” he said, the election is not about dictatorship or democracy. “Peru is a dictatorship of those with economic power.”
Humala dismissed the legal charges against him. He did not use the opportunity of this speech to provide his own account of his record of service as a commander of the Madre Mia base in 1992.
Humala denied that he would break apart the police force, as has been alleged by Alan Garcia.
Humala used now stock lines from his repertoire of campaign jokes and turns of phrase. He talked of traditional, aged, macerated politicians, and explicitly asked Garcia to take a step to the side. He called attention to Garcia’s record in office, and linked Flores to bankers. He accused her of supporting the surrender of Peruvian territory to Ecuador.
He retold the joke about the politician who offers a school, clinic and bridge and then, when told the bridge is not needed because the is no river, offers a river. He also reiterated that he has never met anyone in a military barracks named Kuscynski, Diez Canseco or Belaunde, and lots named Quispe, Huaman, or Humala. Candidates have gone down to defeat on this issue—think only of Vargas Llosa and Perez de Cuellar.
Humala argued for a new constitution, not the one produced by the autogolpe of April 5, 1992—exactly 14 years ago to this day. This would involve “a refounding of the nation.” Humala ended saying “this commander humbly requests you let me command the nation.”
Carlos Ivan Degregori on Electoral Promises
More on Statements by Ollanta Humala in Página/12
Victor Andres Garcia Belaunde, Congressional candidate for Frente de Centro, and Alberto Moreno, presidential candidate for Movimiento Nueva Izquierda, see some basis for Ollanta Humala’s claim that Lourdes Flores, should she be elected, would not last a year, if current economic policies continue under her rule. Ulises, brother of Ollanta Humala and presidential candidate for Avanza Pais, claims that a governemnt led by his brother would not last a year and predict a fall similar to Lucio Gutierrez in Ecuador. Mirko Lauer analyzes the potential for political instability under governments led by Flores and Humala.
Dangerous Liaisons II: Ollanta Humala’s Relations with the Montesinos Mafia
Source: Correo, 6 de abril del 2006
La Primera continues its unveiling of connections between Ollanta Humala with members of the mafia of Vladimiro Montesinos with an interview with Fernando Rospigliosi. Correo provides new information on the 2000 Locumba uprising by the Humala brothers.
Interview with Cecilia Blondet
Interview with Valentín Paniagua
Fallout from Statements by Ollanta Humala in Página/12 Continues
Ollanta Humala’s claim that Lourdes Flores, should she be elected, would not last a year continued to dominate the election campaign today. Lourdes Flores characterized the comment as “undemocratic” and Alan Garcia closed ranks with Lourdes Flores implying that Humala’s comments were cowardly. At issue is whether all the candidates are prepared to respect the democratic rules of the game. Flores and Garcia have used this opportunity to highlight their difference with Humala. Whether this will affect voting intentions is hard to know. It could well limit the chances of any further growth in support for Humala just days before the election. At a time when Humala wants to be creating a sensation of momentum and growth he is besieged by criticisms of his own comments, by the lunch between his vice presidential candidate and a prominent media owner, and by new evidence of elements in his entourage connected to the Montesinos mafia.
Santiago Pedraglio on Fight for Paniagua’s Votes
Santiago Pedraglio argues against the campaign by National Unity to appeal to voters who might plan to support Paniagua in the first round and Flores in the second round. It is well known that Flores has low negative ratings. Few voters would say that under no condition would they vote for Flores. However, some voters would prefer other candidates first. The idea behind the National Unity strategy is to encourage these voters to see the vote for Paniagua as a “lost vote”–and one that could cost Flores the chance of entering the second round. Hence, the argument goes, it would be a vote for Garcia and Humala. It is not clear, however, that Paniagua’s supporters feel much affinity for Flores. In fact, as Pedraglio argues, they may be more likely to identify with the centrist positions of Alan Garcia. Note, that as Paniagua’s vote has declined over this campaign, it does not appear to have benefited Flores.
Valentín Paniagua Attacks Public Opinion Polls
Presidencial candidate for the Frente de Centro, Valentín Paniagua, criticized the use of public opinion polls and regretted the lack of appropriate regulation or auditing of the polls.
Mayor Ítalo Ponce, promotor de la campaña de UPP, vinculado con Montesinos
Source: La República, 5 de abril del 2006
Según La República, el diario ha reunido pruebas de que el oficial Ítalo Carmelo Ponce Montero y otros cuatro miembros de la promoción de Ollanta Humala visitan con regularidad a Óscar López Meneses, procesado junto a Vladimiro Montesinos por corrupción.
Interview with Ollanta Humala
In this interview with BBC Mundo, posted by Venezolana de Television, candidate Ollanta Humala expresses his concerns with the armed forces not being able to vote on April 9th.
Página/12 (Arg) Interview with Ollanta Humala
Asked “What would happen in Peru if the elections are won by Lourdes Flores, who represents a continuation of the economic model?” Ollanta Humala responds “The same as has happened to presidents in other Latin American countries which were removed by the people. I think it would be very hard for Lourdes Flores to last a year in government.” “What role would you play in this process?” asks the interviewer. “I would be in the democratic opposition.”
Reaction from the candidates has been swift. Alan Garcia says Humala needs to learn democratic manners. A spokesperson for National Unity, Xavier Barron, said the comment is a clear threat of a coup.
La nueva estrategia de Unidad Nacional
Dangerous Liaisons: Ollanta Humala’s Relations with the Montesinos Mafia
According to La Primera, Ollanta Humala has connections with a number of members of the mafia of Vladimiro Montesinos. These include Oscar Lopez Meneses, who supports Humala from prison, and has met with members of Humala’s graduating class. La Republica profiles Adrian Villafuerte Macha, who is part of the Humala campaign team and served under Cesar Saucedo, part of the Montesinos mafia. A piece in Agenciaperu.com makes the Humala uprising in October 2000 look like a bit of a tragi-comedy. It suggests the rebellion was carried out with the connivance of senior officers linked to Montesinos.
New Strategy for Frente de Centro: Chaparron Re-Loaded
Source: Peru 21, April 4, 2006