The Colombian Conservative Party is on a moral crusade. Top of its list of priorities is the outlawing of abortion. Colombia is a deeply Catholic country and traditions are proudly respected here. So will the Conservatives´ campaign gain popular support?
As reported on this website a month ago, abortion in Colombia is already forbidden in all but the most extreme of cases - if the woman's life is threatened, if the pregnancy is the result of rape, or if the fetus is expected to die shortly after birth. Before 2006 abortion was illegal, in all cases.
The change in the law has not had a dramatic effect. While legal abortion in the UK stands at around 200,000 abortions a year, Colombia has recorded as few as 641 cases of legal abortion between 2006 and 2010. Not surprising perhaps, given the tight perameters of the law.
What, then, is the imperative to return to the pre-2006 legal position? The Conservatives´ argue that they are supported by the traditional values on which Colombian society is built. Pointing to a petition to abolish legal abortions, signed by 5 million Colombians, they also assert that they are backed-up by popular will.
Commentators and politicans opposing the campaign beg to differ. They suggest that the case for changing the law can only be made on religious grounds - that there is no science to support it. They are also sceptical as to whether the majority of the rest of the Colombia´s 45 million citizens share the view expressed by the 5 million petition signatories.
So what are the prospects of the law being passed? Last week the proposal was taken to the Congress. President Santos chose not to whip his colleagues allowing his U party to vote on the issue according to their conscience. Nevertheless, it failed to secure the requisite votes to take its next step in the legislative process. As a result, the initative has been archived - as they call it here.
Reacting to this, the Conservative leadership is now proposing to take the initiave to a vote, but this time to all of the Colombians - via a referendum.
Why are the Conservative Party insisting on taking this step? There are two explanations.
The first is simple - it´s a political move; dog-whistle politics ahead of the elections on 30 October, designed to shore up the Conservative base and encourage greater turn-out.
The second is more complicated and profound for the Conservative movement. It is being whispered that the Conservative Party is in search of an identity. The questions it is asking itself are - How should this traditional force of Colombian politics position itself in the 21 century? How should it behave in Santos´ coalition government? Ultimately, what is it for?
 |
| Pastrana and Uribe in happier times |
There is a fight taking place at the top of the party - a fight for the direction of the party. Last month, this website reported on ex President Andres Pastrana´s attempt to seize the Conservative Party crown from current leader Jose Dario Salazar.
Reports arose in September that key Conservative politicans were coalescing around Pastrana, seeking to install him as leader as soon as this month´s elections were out of the way. Naturally, Jose Dario Salazar is figthting to prevent this. Pastrana is stoking the fire - he took to the airwaves last week (following the vote on the abortion reforms) to condemn the current direction of the Conservative Party. In an interview with the RCN Radio (one of Colombia´s leading media outlets) Pastrana acused the Conservative leadership of losing its way, claiming that after the elections the party will "cease to be an alternative" that it needs to be "reformed, returning to what it used to be".
Pastrana and Salazar represent quite different prospectuses for the future of the party.
These opposing views are defined by the shadow cast by former president Alvaro Uribe. The Conservative Party under Jose Dario Salazar became a party of the coalition that supported President Uribe - it ceased to be an independent identity. Jose Dario is an arch Uribista while Pastrana has long been a highly outspoken critic of the ex President.
For Pastrana's supporters, the Conservative Party should - now that Uribe is no longer in power - move on and strike a new political pose. What's more, such voices are suggesting that the values of the Conservative Party were sold out during the Uribe years - that the Conservative movement needs to reassert itself, reclaiming its own voice. Pastrana himself argued metaphorically that the flags of Conservative principles had been swapped for the dirty sheets of marriages with questionable political forces. He was alluding to the politicians in the last government who stand accused of corruption, arguing that the reputation of the Conservatives had been tarnished by these alliances.
The Colombian Conservative party continues - for now - to be one of the most powerful political forces in the country. It has one of the largest groupings in both houses of the Congress. The challenge it faces is how to retain its relevance in post-Uribe politics. Will it follow the lead of the Conservatives in the US and the UK in recent years, promoting compassionate and liberal Conservatism? Or will it revert to its core beliefs? The success of Pastrana's pitch for power will have a significant impact on the direction of travel - as perhaps will the results of the election on 30 October.