Peruvian parliamentarism or the legacy of Fujimori

By: Beatrice E. Rangel - 18/09/2024

Share:     

The death of Alberto Fujimori brings us back to Latin America in the 1980s, when two continental phenomena occurred. The nations of the region defaulted on their foreign debt while dictatorships fell into a dead end of freedom and development. The scenario was one of the achievement of freedom within an economic crisis of continental proportions.

In this context, Alberto Fujimori's entry into Peruvian politics could not have been more spectacular. He won the elections in the second round, defeating the favorite of the media, the intellectual community and the Latin American people: Mario Vargas Llosa.

The previously unknown professor from a small and unimportant university began his presidency assuming as a fundamental priority the defeat of the violent groups of the Peruvian radical left that followed the model of Guba or China. And that priority was achieved when Abimael Guzmán, the leader of the Shining Path, the most violent of the guerrilla groups, was imprisoned. He also stabilized the economy, relaunching Peru's growth that reached 12%.

But as all repression generates authoritarianism and criminal collisions, Fujimori's strategy, while achieving the objective of defeating violence, trampled on human rights in the best Genghis Khan style. Deciding to seize power, dissolve Congress and proclaim himself dictator, Fujimori began to participate in the favorite sport of more than one Latin American head of state: corruption. The response of the domestic elites and the hemispheric community was not long in coming. Fujimori was removed from the presidency and faced with the strong possibility of ending up in prison, he decided to go to Japan, the land of his ancestors, where he lived with the benefit of dual citizenship until 2005, when he moved to Chile with a view to participating in the Peruvian elections of 2006. At the request of the Peruvian authorities, he was arrested, extradited to Peru and tried for crimes against humanity and corruption. Since 2009, he has been in prison serving a 25-year sentence.

The Fujimori experience led the Peruvian elites to forge a model of democratic stabilization hitherto unknown on the continent. It involves achieving governability through parliamentary means. And although the constitution has not yet been modified to establish a de jure parliamentary system, power in Peru is exercised by Congress. This scheme is different from the rest of the region, where feudal institutions still survive with caudillo cultures that grant immense power to the executive. Peru, on the contrary, has managed to shackle the executive to such an extent that the last thirty years have seen the prosecution and imprisonment of all presidents, with prime ministers completing their terms.

Although the Peruvian model has the virtue of having maintained democratic functioning without creating domestic or international upheavals, the lack of codification of this hastily instituted parliamentarism has opened countless channels to corruption and statism. But above all, it has eliminated the channels for formulating long-range economic policies. As is well known, Latin American business is an extractor of rents and little inclined to the creation of wealth. To achieve development, it is necessary to change the lens. And just as Mexican businessmen confronted with a free trade agreement with the United States decided to take advantage of this channel to internationalize, Peruvians must do the same. But to do so, it is necessary to formulate public economic policies that create incentives for a change of vision. Without a stable executive power, this objective is difficult to achieve.

The absence of this economic command post explains the poor performance of the Peruvian economy in recent times. Perhaps Fujimori's death will make the Peruvian elites reflect on this shortcoming and suspend the Fujimori antidote that led them to dismantle the executive power without regulating the parliamentary modus operandi that prevails de facto.

«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».