Democratic quality in Latin America.

• Author: Ugalde, Luis Carlos

The tenth anniversary of the Inter-American Democratic Charter provides a good opportunity to reflect on the state of democracy in Latin America. The situation is mixed. On the one hand, the countries of the region have safeguarded the foundations of electoral democracy and implemented mechanisms for the peaceful turnover of power, at times with OAS support. On the other hand, the quality of governance (the way in which public power is exercised) remains poor and has declined in some countries. Latin America does not have a passing grade in the area of democratic quality and good governance.

As far as electoral democracy is concerned, Latin America is better off now than ten years ago. Not only are there periodic elections anal greater freedoms, but the temptation to use violence anal coups d'etat to undermine democracy has been avoided, despite the exception of Honduras. Among the governance categories assessed by the World Bank, Latin America fared best in "voice and accountability," that is, the enhanced ability of citizens to elect and oversee their leaders, through freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and a free press.

However, aside from its high marks for electoral democracy, the region is at the same level or slightly worse off than ten years ago in terms of other democratic quality indicators. According to the same World Bank governance indicators (political stability, rule of law, government effectiveness, control of corruption, regulatory quality, and voice and accountability), it is dangerously lacking in almost every category. Of course the paradigms of democratic quality continue to be Chile, Uruguay, and Costa Rica, which had satisfactory ratings in every category. But all the other countries were in the mid or low range.

The poorest grades are for the rule of law. This is critical because lawfulness is the cornerstone of a liberal, sound, consolidated democracy. Without it, democracies crumble and become populist, demagogic, or authoritarian.

Absence of the rule of law results in impunity and corruption. It seems contradictory in theory that corruption has remained in place and has even worsened in some cases in the presence of increased democracy. It doesn't make sense that greater freedom of expression has not led to greater honesty in government. In other words, freedom of expression, a better balance of powers, and increased civil society participation have not been sufficient to improve the rule of law and combat...