Can Peru’s Democracy Survive Corruption?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/25/opinion/peru-democracy-corruption.html

Version 0 of 1.

LIMA, Peru — After almost 20 years of trying to rebuild its democracy, Peru is still struggling to find a formula that allows an elected government to operate without corruption. A succession of presidents are fugitives or in prison. And in the latest crisis, Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, after less than two years as president, was forced to resign last Wednesday, the biggest casualty to date in a seemingly endless graft scandal that has spread across Latin America.

Mr. Kuczynski had little choice but to step down after surreptitiously filmed videos showed government officials offering opposition lawmakers enticements and bribes in an attempt to avert his impeachment by Congress.

Secretly filmed videos also brought an abrupt end, in 2000, to the authoritarian rule of Mr. Kuczynski’s predecessor Alberto Fujimori. Mr. Fujimori, sentenced to 25 years in prison for human rights violations and corruption in 2009, was freed under a presidential pardon in December as part of deal to save Mr. Kuczynski’s presidency. But this time, like Mr. Fujimori, Mr. Kuczynski could not survive the curse of videos.

And yet, while videos and other exposés have thrown light on the shady transactions taking place among and around Peru’s recent presidents, corruption has continued. It has become easier to oust or even jail a president than it is to clean up the country’s politics.

In just three weeks, Peru will host, under the new presidency of Martín Vizcarra, the former vice president, the Summit of the Americas, which will be attended by heads of states, including President Trump. Not surprisingly, its main themes are improving democratic governance and the fight against corruption.

But can democracy survive and succeed in defeating all-pervading political corruption? Can Peru’s democracy develop a judiciary that is strong and independent enough to tackle the problem? And if not, one might ask, why bother to hold elections that give politicians license to defraud the electorate?

The way in which Peru addresses this crisis is crucial for Latin America, where the Brazilian conglomerate Odebrecht’s bribing of presidents, ministers and candidates to win public contracts unleashed the graft scandal. Amid a growing disillusionment with democracy, crucial elections will take place this year across the region.

The Peruvian drama is a case in point. Corruption is deeply rooted in Peruvian history. For almost three centuries of colonial rule, gold and silver from the Andes highlands were shipped to Spain. In 1821, amid a long war that ravaged the country and left it bankrupt, an independent republic was declared with big dreams and aspirations. But from the start, in the building of its railroads and in exploiting new riches like guano from its islands and rubber from its jungle, Peru saw its economic splendor quickly vanish, squandered in a swamp of corruption.

More recently, former President Alejandro Toledo has been a fugitive from justice fighting extradition from the United States. Another former president, Ollanta Humala, is behind bars pending charges of corruption. And Mr. Fujimori’s daughter, Keiko, whose party, Popular Force, holds the majority in Congress and has been instrumental in driving Mr. Kuczynski from office, is under investigation for corruption and money laundering. She also wants to be president and was only narrowly defeated by Mr. Kuczynski in 2016.

Should we despair? I don’t think so, because in the past 25 years the country has actually made great progress. It ended an internal war against the terrorist group Shining Path, settled conflicts with its neighbors, overcame hyperinflation, became a relatively stable democracy and, despite its current predicament, achieved economic growth and reduced poverty.

So why has eradicating corruption proved so difficult? The recipes for good governance and anticorruption strategies have long been known, but enforcement has dismally failed.

A crucial issue is that the lack of control of illegal and foreign financing of presidential elections combined with extremely weak party structures have turned campaigns into an easy way for adventurous newcomers to become millionaires even before reaching power. Presidential candidates in Peru have been financed by Venezuela and Brazil, and the funding from the latter came linked to allocating huge public infrastructure contracts to previously handpicked Brazilian construction firms. With such a system in place, little wonder Peruvians continue to elect thieves as presidents.

And we’ve been here before. Venality was widespread in the 1990s under Mr. Fujimori, when his top adviser, the infamous head of the secret services Vladimiro Montesinos, corrupted the whole spectrum of Peruvian society, bribing politicians, bankers, entrepreneurs, judges, military officers and journalists, videotaping them in the act, building grotesque pyramids of cash as he carried out extortions. When the tapes were shown on prime-time TV, a governmental commission with respected figures was created to design a thorough and vigorous strategy to fight corruption.

Ironically, it was Mr. Toledo, a candidate running on a banner of eradicating corruption, who even before becoming president stole campaign money given to him by George Soros. He then asked Odebrecht’s chief executive in Peru for a $35 million bribe — he got only $20 million — and set up fresh machinery for graft.

As finance minister and prime minister a decade ago in Mr. Toledo’s government, Mr. Kuczynski was in charge of overseeing a system that resulted in overpriced public projects. Mr. Kuczynski’s firm had contracts with Odebrecht while he was a public servant.

What next? It is not clear whether Mr. Kuczynski will face charges. But he is under investigation and a judge has ordered that he not be allowed to leave Peru and granted a search warrant for his three houses in Lima. His successor, Mr. Vizcarra, who has an untarnished public record, will face public pressure to put an effective anticorruption strategy into effect.

But his hand is weak. He will serve out Mr. Kuczynski’s term through 2021, but he will have to live with a Congress dominated by Keiko Fujimori’s party.

The struggle against corruption requires strong institutions and leadership — both lacking in Peru. Many of the decision makers with the power to reform the system have been accused of wrongdoing. Key players in the public and private sector also benefit from a corrupt system. They are the most interested in maintaining the status quo. Are they going to carry out the much-needed electoral and political reform that can end up putting them at risk of going to jail?

The one card the Mr. Vizcarra still holds is the widespread disillusionment with Peru’s Congress. If he can mobilize public opinion to support a new anticorruption campaign, he may force lawmakers to go along with it for fear of being exposed. Mr. Vizcarra is the accidental president, but the fact that he never aspired to this job may prove to be his strongest political weapon.