The IACHR has determined that presidential re-election is not a human right

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) ruled on Thursday that presidential re-election for an indefinite period is not under the protection of the American Convention, and it is therefore not a human right, that Evo Morales brandished in 2017 to cling to the presidency, despite the negative referendum.

“The greatest current danger for the democracies of the region is not a brutal collapse of the constitutional order, but a gradual erosion of democratic guarantees which can lead to an authoritarian regime, even if it is elected in elections. popular “, warns the document published by the IACHR.

In the first place, the Court concluded that presidential re-election for an indefinite period is not an autonomous human right, since it has no normative recognition in the Convention or the American Declaration, and in general, in the corpus juris of international human rights law, in other international treaties, in regional custom or in general principles of law.

On the other hand, he stressed that the prohibition of indefinite presidential re-election may be compatible with the Convention, provided it is established in law. In this regard, the Court explained that the ban on indefinite presidential re-election aims to guarantee representative democracy, Therefore, it is in conformity with the Convention and, given the concentration of powers that the figure of the President has in a presidential system, restricting the possibility of indefinite re-election is an ideal measure to ensure this objective.

In addition, the IACHR clarified that has not found other equally appropriate measures to ensure that one person does not perpetuate himself in power and thus the separation of powers is not affected, the plural regime of political parties and organizations, as well as the alternation in the exercise of power. “The potential impact on the right of the person who holds the office of president to be re-elected, as well as the restriction this implies for voters, are minor sacrifices compared to the advantages that the ban on an indefinite presidential re-election. brings to society.”, We read in the writing.

On the other hand, concerning the compatibility of the indefinite presidential re-election with human rights standards, the Court emphasized that the absence of restrictions on the presidential re-election leads to the weakening of the political parties and movements that make up the opposition, by not having a clear expectation as to their possibility of accessing the exercise of power.

In turn, he argued that the permanence of power of a president for a long period affects the independence and the separation of powers, taking into account the capacities that he may have to appoint members of other powers of the state. Likewise, he considered that the function of Presidency confers on the person who occupies it a privileged position for the electoral race: “The longer the time spent in office, the greater this advantage.”

The CIDH concluded that allowing an indefinite presidential re-election is contrary to the principles of a representative democracy and, consequently, to the obligations established in the American Convention and the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man.

This decision is incompatible with the November 2017 decision of the Plurinational Constitutional Court (TCP) of Bolivia, which, protected by the Pact of San José in Costa Rica, it gave way to a third continuous re-election of the former president as “a human right”.

As reported by the agency Europe Press, Evo Morales rejected the unfavorable opinion of the CDIH re-election for an indefinite period after consultation with the President of Colombia, Iván Duque, at the request of the Bolivian opposition, accusing the law of “double standards” and seeking to “destabilize” democracy in the country. “The advisory opinion promoted by Duque, the violator of human rights in Colombia, is an attack by the putschist (Luis) Almagro, (secretary general of the Organization of American States) and his right-wing accomplices to politically destabilize democracy, ”Morales wrote on Twitter.

Read on: