“It is important that in the Casa de Nariño they remember that every statement made has the support of the State behind it.”
Photo: Joel_Presidencia
The president of the republic, Gustavo Petro, and the director of the Administrative Department of the Presidency, Laura Sarabia, have the right to publicly defend themselves against anything they consider necessary. This includes, as the director has done, responding when members of her family are questioned for apparent improper actions. However, it is important that in the Casa de Nariño they remember that every statement made has the support of the State behind it, so falling into stigmatization of the press, or defining what is good journalism and what is not, is an excess of its functions that affects a key constitutional right for democracy.
This week, President Petro and Director Sarabia are upset by the questions that Andrés Sarabia, the latter’s brother, has faced. At least until the closing of this edition, it is speculation, as we have covered in El Espectador. There are voices calling for investigations and clarifications regarding Andrés Sarabia’s assets, and he has responded that he will present all the information to the Attorney General’s Office, while rejecting any wrongdoing. That is a matter that will have to be clarified by the authorities and, hopefully, by the investigative work of the press.
We do not want to enter into the substance of these allegations, particularly because we do not have sufficient information to do so responsibly. What does concern us is the language and tone used by both President Petro and Director Sarabia to defend themselves. In the process, they attack freedom of the press, even though they disguise it as a legitimate concern for good journalistic content.
Regarding columnist María Jimena Duzán, President Petro decided to use personal terms that are not appropriate for the position he holds. “To insinuate that I exchange positions in my government for councils is a true lack of respect for myself,” wrote the president. The rhetorical trick is very problematic: asking questions about the conduct of a public servant is not disrespectful, it is only monitoring power. That is what journalism does. That, too, is what all people who want to be part of the State must respect and endure. Journalism is uncomfortable, of course, and journalists make mistakes, of course, but a president of the Republic has the function of protecting that work, not reducing it to personalisms and school squabbles.
To complete, the president then said that “’Mossad journalism’ prevails.” A few days ago he had said, in another speech, that the Colombian media “has become a Mossad press.” Again, it’s about stigmatization. It leaves in the air the idea that everyone who does journalism is part of a conspiracy against the Government. The righteous and the sinners are thrown into the same bag, leaving the most vulnerable journalists at risk.
In her defense, Sarabia has not used such disparaging words, but she has discredited journalistic work and has resorted to threats of legal action, which, although it is her right, coming from a high-ranking official has the appearance of judicial harassment. Because her obligation is to give answers to the country, not to give lessons in journalism. As this scandal and those to come, typical of any government, progress, the Casa de Nariño must remember its role as protector of press freedom and, yes, also of journalists.
Do you disagree with this editorial? Send your 500-word anti-editorial to [email protected]
Bolivia is in an institutional crisis, in the midst of crippling economic problems and such deep political divisions, that it is difficult to see how it will face such enormous challenges.
Photo: EFE – STRINGER
The good news for Bolivia is that the coup attempt that the world watched this week fail miserably and those involved are being brought to justice. The bad news is that the country is in an institutional crisis, amid crippling economic problems and political divisions so deep that it is difficult to see how it will be able to meet the enormous challenges it faces. These have been difficult years for Bolivia and all indications are that they will continue to be so.
The theater of military coups is always ridiculous. A Bolivian Army tank, surrounded by uniformed troops, tried to enter a government building. There, the former commander of the Armed Forces, Juan José Zúñiga, called on the people to build a supposedly true democracy and said that the current president, Luis Arce Catacora, had failed the citizens. While this was happening, his men dispersed pro-democracy protesters with tear gas. Fortunately, the reinforcements never arrived, Zúñiga was left virtually alone, the military garrisons that he expected to join him did not respond, Arce changed the leadership of the Army and the new commander ordered the forces to withdraw. A disaster was averted, but the circus was just beginning.
What has happened since the coup attempt shows the problems of a divided nation. Upon being captured, Zúñiga made a disconcerting confession: “The president told me that the situation was fucked up and he needed something to boost his popularity.” And when asked if it was a self-coup, he confirmed: “Yes, yes.” At the time of going to press, the former commander, who has been captured along with 17 other coup plotters, has not made any further statements. His testimony should be taken with a grain of salt, of course, but opponents of the Arce government have adopted the same strategy. Senator William Torrez of the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS), a faithful follower of Evo Morales, said that everything was “at the request” of the government and that “now we could call this (a) self-coup.”
Behind this is the figure of Evo Morales. Although Arce was his Minister of Economy, the current president and the caudillo figure have distanced themselves in recent years. This has led to a paralysis of the Government, as Morales continues to exercise considerable power. To top it off, last year he said he would run for a third term to compete in the election against Arce. “Forced by the attacks of the Government, their plan to ban the MAS-IPSP [Movimiento al Socialismo – Instrumento por la Soberanía de los Pueblos] and defenestrate us with political processes, even physically eliminating us, we have decided to accept the requests of our militancy,” he said. There is only one problem: his candidacy is unconstitutional. Having tried to re-elect himself in violation of the political charter caused a political crisis in 2019 and now Morales intends to carry out another institutional coup d’état.
For all these reasons, beyond the need for the authorities to clarify what happened and who is responsible, the outlook for Bolivia is reserved. Its debt is internationally rated as junk, it has a gasoline crisis that forces the country to spend US$2 billion each year to import fuel, and its natural gas exploitation, which for years had been essential to the economy, is at an all-time low. This week’s explosion is the tip of the iceberg of a country that is sinking in the midst of political confrontations.
Do you disagree with this editorial? Send your 500-word anti-editorial to [email protected]
Director’s note. We need readers like you to continue to produce independent, quality journalism. Consider purchasing a digital subscription and let’s put our faith in the power of words.
