Gorki Gonzales Mantilla
Electoral rules exist to give viability to the principles of representative democracy. However, regardless of the suitability of the electoral system to fulfill the formalities of the election process, but mainly to serve as a moral compass in life party. It is worth remembering that representative democracy is only one facet of constitutional democracy.
In this regard, the disqualification filed against the candidacy of Alex Kouri, evoke rules and problems that, in essence, defines some of the essential features of the crisis of political parties and politics in Peru. In this candidate is accused of failing to comply with a formal requirement (the place of residence), and the absence of internal democracy for the election of candidates, including themselves. Particularly interested in this last objection.
This condition claimed Kouri's candidacy reflects the lack of commitment with the discussion of ideas and deliberation, essential in a constitutional democracy. The idea to organize political parties as if they were companies for private interests, is the corollary of that absence. This seems to be the case in question, not at all alien to the practices in which certain parties are concentrated in order to camouflage the activities of private interest groups.
The imaginary electoral process up to October this year reveals that the public, as a key concept in the construction of constitutional democracy has been broken or, at best, appears in mild form and intermittent. It's like an indefinite projection cultural scaffolding that pragmatism Fujimori won the country's agenda. Luis Cáceres Velásquez, convicted for his links to corruption tested Fuji-Montesinos, and now the candidate of strength to win the mayor of Arequipa, is the best expression of that mark.
Weak public perspective of groups that, like Kouri, wants to rule the country, explains the idea of \u200b\u200bformal democracy that prevails in those farms. The rest of parties and groups present in the Peruvian electoral map, with notable exceptions, remain under the aegis.
In any case, the internal party democracy not just a formality. This is a procedure epistemic value, it should allow the debate on public values \u200b\u200band the sense that they should be effective in civic life. Should allow, in short, the articulation of shared public interests. It is thus that internal democracy is understood as an instrument of constitutional democracy. No deliberation without public proceedings and equal conditions for participating in public debate, and democracy only exists as a whole through these procedures.
epistemic value of deliberative democracy implies internal, is the ability to ensure and enrich the content constitutional values \u200b\u200bas justification for the ideas, projects and manifestos. The absence of this value, where the case Kouri is just one example, appears as an epidemic that weakens and distorts the meaning of constitutional democracy in Peru.
0 comments:
Post a Comment