Participatory Mechanisms in Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela: Deepening or Undermining Democracy?

Abstract

Through the comparative analysis of the participatory mechanisms established in Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela, this study explores under which conditions such mechanisms are more likely to deepen or undermine democracy. While the informal participatory mechanisms established in Bolivia have produced, though imperfectly, significant democratic benefits, in Ecuador and Venezuela crucial participatory mechanisms have appeared to favour the concentration of power in the executive, contributing to the strangulation of representative institutions, the erosion of the separation of powers and the development of government-dominated social groups. By shedding light on the undemocratic manipulation of participatory mechanisms, an area still largely unexplored, this study contributes to a better understanding of the risks and opportunities associated with the deepening of democracy.

Problems and contradictions of participatory democracy: lessons from Latin America

“…While the tendency of segments of the opposition to engage in dubiously democratic or blatantly undemocratic practices in each of these countries -including an attempted coup in Venezuela in 2002 and the 2008 protests against Morales in Bolivia -does not explain variation between these participatory experiences' outcomes, particularly the presence or absence of government-dominated participatory institutions (see Balderacchi, 2015), it highlights a hardly resolvable dilemma. Specifically, how to open participatory mechanisms to an 'enemy' unwilling to recognize the legitimacy of the government and its participatory project and hence likely to take advantage of their participation in public decision-making to unravel participatory democracy?…”

“…Though not without merits, from a democratic standpoint a crucial problem of the CCs has had to do with the ability of the Ministry for the Communes and Social Movements to grant or deny official recognition to citizens trying to constitute a CC. This requirement has provided the government with the opportunity to exclude undesired participants, exert control over these institutions, and hence gradually replace, through ad hoc legislative measures, democratically elected representative institutions with participatory mechanisms under government control (Balderacchi, 2015).…”

“…In line with the Citizen Revolution's participatory rhetoric, ordinary citizens take active participation in the selection process, for example through Citizen Committees. As suggested, for example, by the appointment of a previous minister of Correa to the office of Prosecutor General (Fiscal General), in a process undermining the separation of powers, through these participatory concursos the government has seemed to take control of important state institutions, including the National Electoral Council (CNE) and the Fiscal General (Balderacchi, 2015). Lawsuits pointing to irregularities and abuses were filed during the CPCCS' public competitions (see El Comercio, 2011; La Hora, 2011; Radio Sucre, 2011), but they could not effectively undermine the government's apparently manipulative use of the CPCCS.…”

“…In Bolivia, one of the most important participatory venues has been the CONALCAM, an unofficial institution where the executive and social movements collaborate in the elaboration of public policies and the government of the country. Although, among these countries' participatory experiences, only in Bolivia participatory mechanisms such as the CONALCAM have led to largely autonomous participation, similar to the Ecuadorian and Venezuelan experiences they have not been open to the whole population, restricting access to political allies (Balderacchi, 2015). In fact, the Morales government has not yet seriously engaged in the creation of comprehensive participatory venues where individuals can participate on the basis of universal, objective criteria.…”

“…In a previous comparative study (Balderacchi, 2015), I examined the conditions explaining variation in the democratic performance of central participatory mechanisms in these countries, underlining the ability of the National Coordinator for Change (CONALCAM) to produce autonomous, though not fully open, participation in Bolivia, as opposed to the Communal Councils (CCs) in Venezuela and the Council of Citizen Participation and Social Control (CPCCS) in Ecuador. As observed in this analysis (Balderacchi, 2015), far from producing autonomous participation, the CPCCS and the CCs have appeared as manipulative instruments in the hands of the government. Drawing on some of this analysis' findings and on more recent examples, in the next sections I show that important problems and limitations affecting participatory mechanisms may be associated with the attempt to establish these institutions in ineffective liberal democracies and in contexts characterized by significant exclusion and inequality.…”