Crisis in Peru proves that presidential system is obsolete in Latin America

(Interamerican Institute for Democracy) When Peru’s president Pedro Castillo decided “to dissolve Congress, create a national emergency’s government, call for elections to Congress with constituent power, govern by legal decree, establish nightly curfew, and reorganize the judicial system,” he was proclaiming himself as dictator by commandeering all of the State’s power for himself, a situation that motivated his destitution, detention, prosecution, and succession by his Vice President Dina E. Boluarte.

On 7 December of 2022, Peru’s Constitutional President proclaimed himself a dictator hours before a session of Congress whose agenda included his removal. The response by Peruvian institutions is a demonstration of democracy’s strength. Congress removed him from office for having incurred publicly and flagrantly in a violation of Article 45 of Peru’s Constitution that mandates “the power of the State emanates from the people and anyone wielding this power does so with the limitations and responsibilities that the Constitution and laws establish. No one; individual, organization, Armed Force, National Police, or a population’s sector, can arrogate to themselves the right to such power. To do so, constitutes rebellion or sedition.”

Pedro Castillo’s arguments, in his 9.57-minute speech with which he broke-away from democracy were; that “the discredited congressional majority” did not let him govern for the good of the peoples, that the “corrupted, mercenary, and cynical press” falsely harasses him, that “Congress has destroyed the Rule of Law” and has installed a “Congressional dictatorship with the current Constitutional Tribunal”, reasons why he decided “to establish a government by exception”.

Castillo made it to the presidency getting -on the first round- 18.92% of the votes from the 70.05% of participating voters, this is a net of 13.25% of registered voters in a group of 20 presidential candidates. In the second round, he obtained 50.13%, but since congressional members are elected in the first round, he only had 37 seats in Congress, in other words 28.46% of congressional votes. A president with the first minority of votes, 13.25% at the national level, facing a Congress made up by parliamentarians from 9 political fronts who had been elected.

In Latin America, the proliferation of political parties, fronts, and organizations who can participate in elections has brought along the destruction of the foundation of the Presidential System in which the legitimacy of the president lies in the direct popular vote who, respecting the separation and independence of the branches of government cannot govern without coordination with the Legislative Branch and the control of the Judicial Branch. With 20 candidates on the first round and with a winner with less than 14% of backing, just as it happened in Peru’s elections in 2021, it is impossible to expect the president to have unchallenged governance because the second round of voting is now only a forced tie breaker.

What happened in Peru is now being repeated in almost all of Latin America and is a clear sign of the proliferation of dictatorships. Some cases, as in Ecuador’s elections in which the now President Guillermo Lasso obtained 27.91% in the first round, or the elections in Chile in which the now President Gabriel Boric obtained 25.83% of votes in the first round, or the elections in Colombia in which the now President Gustavo Petro obtained 40.34% of votes from the 54.98% of registered voters participating. And some other cases as in Nicaragua where in 2006 Daniel Ortega was elected on the first round with 38% of votes because previously the percentage needed to win the first round had been lowered to 35%.

In Latin America, the Presidential System is taking to the presidency of the countries those candidates who obtain the first minority of votes and is not enough for anyone elected to have good governance. They are minority-backed presidents and that alone brings instability and bad governance and the temptation to become dictators, concentrating all power and controlling all branches of government or changing them at their whim through Constituent Assemblies and referendums, just as has happened in Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Ecuador with Correa and the recent frustrated attempt of Castillo in Peru.

With dozens of political parties and candidates, with decreased and split numbers of voters and without a tradition or a possibility of accords between the minority-elected President with the -also split- opposition who control the Legislative Branch, the Presidential System is today a sure recipe for non-governance or a lack of the capability to govern. This scenario is ripe for conflicts and crises, just as is being proven in Peru where from 2018 to this date, in 4 years, they have had six presidents and is under the threat to have more because it does not have the mechanisms to modify reality.

In the current situation, Dina E. Boluarte should considered herself as a transitory president and lead a great national accord to take Peru to a reform that will advance towards the full parliamentarian system or will establish the conditions for the Presidential System to work well. The time for parliamentarianism to strengthen democracy in Latin America is soon to arrive.

*Attorney & Political Scientist. Director of the Interamerican Institute for Democracy.

Translation from Spanish by Edgar L. Terrazas