Experts have criticized feudal Argentina and warned of the state of democracy in some provinces

At its headquarters in Miami, Florida, the Inter-American Institute for Democracy (IID) presented alongside GlobeLiveMedia a series of reports on the state of democracy, cases of alleged human rights violations and the validity of feudalism in Argentina.

The experts who took part in the event addressed, for example, what happened to Manuel Asencio Ardilesa 73-year-old farmer who lived in Santiago del Estero and died a few days ago, after being stripped of his possessions.

The presentation was made within the framework of the forum entitled “The two Argentinas: democracy and feudalism”which was held this Wednesday and included the participation of a panel of personalities and speakers critical of the national political situation.

You may be interested: The high price of the crimes of dictatorships for democracies

The work was carried out as part of the follow-up to the recommendations made by the UN, on the basis of which the IID sent a mission to the country of its Commission on Human Rights, which is chaired by Armando Valladareswriter and former US ambassador long known for having been a political prisoner for 22 years, opposing the Cuban revolution.

Among the experts was the journalist Mariel FitzPatrickwith who Ivan Ruiz there Sandra Crucianelli recently published a memo that reviews who the Argentine leaders have been in power for decades.

“We have detected that in a third of the Argentine provinces there is a phenomenon of permanence of their leaders in power, either through continuous re-elections or through the appointment of political dolphins who respond to them. In practice, these neighborhoods become impregnable strongholds against any attempt at opposition, which should trigger the alert in any democracy,” explains the researcher.

The Fitz Patrick, Ruiz and Crucianelli report concluded that the Rodriguez Saa in Saint Louis, Gildo Insfran in Formosa, the Kirchner in Sainte-Croix, Gerard Zamora and your partner, claudia abdalain Santiago del EsteroJuan Schiaretti In Cordoba, and Jorge Capitanich in the Chaco, it is the provincial chiefs who they lead the ranking of tenure in power. The phenomenon is repeated in several municipalities, particularly in the province of Buenos Aires.

“This durability in positions is also linked to the possibility of having resources which make these regimes considered as rentiers, who use a large part of the funds they receive from the Nation”, warned the journalist.

You may be interested: State terrorism prosecuted in Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua

The researcher noted that this situation allows provincial leaders to “generate an eminently state-owned economy” that “increases dependency, both of businessmen who have contracts with the local state, as well as people who have public and media jobs that they live by the official directive”.

“There is a lack of public information that myself and my colleagues have experienced at the time of writing the article. Added to this are also abuses of power and discretionary management in all areas, which affect the rule of law, and cases of institutional violence by the police which have not been clarified”, he added.

Finally, Fitz Patrick gave the emblematic example of Gildo Insfran in Formosa, who “has 7 consecutive terms, 27 years as governor, plus eight more previous as lieutenant governor, (which totals) 36 consecutive years, the longest period served by a president, without interruption, since the return of democracy”.

The event started after 8:00 p.m. with the opening of Tomas Regaladopresident of the IID, former mayor of Miami, and former director of Radio Televisión Martí, the international Spanish-language radio and television service funded by the United States government that broadcasts Cuba.

“This year we are trying to take the agenda to a new level, participating directly in the national debates of important countries, in the case of today it is that of Argentina and the visit of the directors of this institution in this country”, explained the presenter.

In this sense, Regalado pointed out that Valladares and Fitz Patrick “have managed to bring, documented in text and video, irrefutable personal cases”, which he pointed out is “exactly what the press aspires to do”.

“Today, we have the collaboration of GlobeLiveMedia report what is really happening in Argentina. It’s also time to unmask those who say it’s a functional democracy, because this year Argentines will have to choose between light and shadow when they go to the polls,” he said. added.

You may be interested: “Quo Vadis Brasil”: a colloquium of leaders and scholars explored the prospects of democracy in South American power

For his part, Valladares specified that between January 18 and 25, they were in Argentina “with the aim of verifying on the spot the complaints received for violation of human rights against citizens of Santiago del Estero who had dispossessed of their lands” by officials who wield political and judicial power, with the most specific case of Manuel Asencio Ardiles and his family”.

“The Inter-American Institute for Democracy commission a legal analysis of the process, which will include the arguments of the President of the Supreme Court of Justice, who is the one who caused this whole situation. In my view, the violation of the human rights of the late Ardiles and his family was flagrant as they were subjugated and kept in a helpless situation,” the former US Ambassador added.

As part of the panel, in addition to Fitz Patrick, were the lawyer, former diplomat and director of the IID, Marcel Feraud; international political analyst and professor at Georgetown University, Hector Schamis; lawyer and political adviser Enrique Avogadro; the accountant and consultant, Norberto Spangaro; Ambassador to Israel and Costa Rica, Mariano Caucin; and the journalist and television host, Hugo Machiavelli.

“In many provinces, the fact that democracy is a means of accessing and exercising power is not taken into account, and that when you live in a presidential regime, not having an alternation in power, it means ceasing to have democracy in the medium or long term. . This is part of the article GlobeLiveMediaSchamis noted.

For his part, Feraud assured that the Ardiles episode “is not an isolated case, but rather a pattern of conduct: the usurpation of land that takes place through a kind of machinery between provincial and national power”. .

In line with his colleagues, Caucino warned against “the emergence of internal enemies in the systems, such as populist models, who accept the democratic game, run for election, but despise the division of powers, which is the true basis of the republican principle and federalism”.

“In Argentina, in 1983, when democracy was restored, no province authorized re-election, today all authorize it, except two, Santa Fe and Mendoza, and some even authorize indefinite re-election”, wonders he.

The discussion was moderated by Beatrice Rangelmember of the Council on Foreign Relations of the United States, while the closure was left in the hands of Carlos Sanchez BerzainBolivian lawyer and politician who was a member of the cabinet of former President Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada.

“The advance of authoritarianism, which is the right word to hide the term dictatorship, which very few people want to utter, has been very great. What is called feudalism in Argentina are dictatorships: Santiago del Estero, Formosa, all those provinces where there is no rule of law,” Berzaín concluded.

Continue reading: