Elections for the senate and chamber of representatives were held in March in Colombia. There were high expectations about them because candidates from different political parties were proposing new ideas to tackle corruption and violence in the country. However, the elections were overshadowed by the incompetence of the National Register Office, responsible for counting the votes and announcing final results. The process was so inefficient that one month later we do not yet know who was elected. Unfortunately, preliminary results show that expectations of having a congress unlinked to corruption and drug trafficking will not be fulfilled. So far, the only positive result from parliamentary elections has been the overwhelming support for a new independent political party. What are the consequences of all these outcomes for the future of Colombia?
This year fourteen political parties participated in congressional elections in Colombia. Four were newly founded and three backed president Uribe. Two of the new political parties excelled in the elections – one positively and one extremely negatively for the country. The positive quota was from the ‘Green party’ set up by three former mayors of the Colombian capital Bogata. It was led by Antanas Mockus, Enrique Penalosa and Lucho Garzon, who transformed Bogota into one of the best cities in Latin America during sixteen years of administration. Their independent political party got nearly 10 per cent of total votes and five candidates elected to the senate (five per cent of total seats), according to preliminary election results. In addition, the electoral internal consultation to elect the presidential candidate of the party won unexpectedly high participation from voters. Antanas Mockus was chosen to run for presidency and now represents the best political option for many Colombians. But could he win without the support from any political machinery?
The negative quota in Colombia’s parliamentary elections was from the ‘National Integration Party’. It was established by relatives of politicians and businessmen accused of having links with drug trafficking. Although the party was founded only three months before the elections, so far eight candidates have been elected for senate (eight per cent of total seats). There have been many allegations that candidates bought votes all around the country but nothing has yet been proved. In fact, it is very unlikely that anyone would open an investigation against them. The Colombian congress should be composed of reliable politicians to overcome corruption and violence. So how come we have so many relatives of those imprisoned for drug trafficking running for congressional elections? Whatever the reason, it is certainly not positive for the country.
Besides the dreadful victory of the ‘National Integration Party’ in this year’s parliamentary elections, the National Register Office has been so inefficient in processing the information that one month after the elections final results have not yet been announced. Congressional elections in Colombia in 2010 are considered a fiasco because counting votes has taken so long that we won’t ever know if the senate and chamber of representatives taking office later this year was legitimately elected. Even more, the new ballot paper designed for these elections was so complex that nearly 15 per cent of votes were null. The inefficiency of the National Register Office discourages people from voting. In these elections 60 per cent of the electorate didn’t vote. The figure could be much higher in future elections if the voting process is not improved.
Preliminary election results show that lack of participation of women and minority groups is still an issue for the recently elected congress in Colombia. So far, only eighteen women have been elected to the senate and fourteen to the chamber of representatives (17 per cent and eight per cent of total seats respectively). Although women’s participation in congress slightly increased in these elections, Colombia has the worst gender imbalance in parliamentary institutions among south American countries. Participation of the indigenous and Afro-Colombian population is also limited. There are one-hundred and two indigenous towns in Colombia but only two senate seats are designated for them. The same seats are allocated for Afro-Colombians despite the fact that most of the people living along the Pacific and Caribbean coasts are classified within that group.
The big winner in Colombian congressional elections was president Uribe. His party got 70 per cent of total votes, securing 27 per cent of seats in the senate. The conservatives, who openly back Uribe, obtained the second largest number of votes. Continuity of the ‘democratic security’ policy seems to be crucial for voters. In contrast, the big loser was the left party, winning half the votes compared to the last congressional election. Differences within the party had discouraged followers who now have their expectations of achieving social justice in Colombia set in the newly formed ‘Green party’.
The consequences of the outcome of congressional elections for Colombia are unfavourable for the next president. The significant representation of the ‘National Integration Party’ in the senate and chamber of representatives won’t be helpful for tackling drug trafficking. In addition, minority groups won’t have enough representation in the new congress and people will remain sceptical about the importance of voting. This fiasco should be a lesson for the government – Colombia needs tighter regulations for political candidates, efficient public institutions to guarantee legitimacy in the elections and a bigger effort to encourage people to vote.
Maria Carolina Latorre is an associate researcher at the Institute for Public Policy Research – ippr and Director of Psocial a consultancy company specialising in research for social policy