#Petro

by

Is the March for Peace an April Fools?

IMAGEN-12732190-2

The 9th of April is actually a day of war in Colombian history, but this year, in 2013, a varied coalition is trying to convert it into a day of peace, yet the effort only reveals their rivalries.

When Jorge Eliecer Gaitain, a hero to the poor, and candidate for the Presidency, was shot down outside of his office in Bogotá on this day in 1948 it sparked some of the worst violence in the history of country that is no stranger to tumult.

Ever since, the day has been a favourite for rallying, marching, and remembering. This is especially true since the passage of the Victims’ Law in 2011, which officially declared the 9th of April to be the national day of memorial for the victims of Colombian’s “armed conflict” (as broadly defined as it is).

With a secretive peace process between the Government and the FARC guerllia continuing in Havana, Cuba, the Government and many civil society groups are now trying to use the day to rally public support for the process, that so far, has few true friends.

But, as always, various interests are using the focal point to both build and demonstrate power in a febrile atmosphere as the country heads into election season in 2014.

Given its origins, the march itself was originally a demonstration of the interests, needs, and demands of the victims of the armed conflict. A cause supported by many groups (in varying ways) from movements such as the Marcha Patriotica to human rights NGOs.

In fact, it is Marcha Patriotica, one of the most vocal and largest leftist movements in the country, who is claiming to have originally proposed that this year’s march focus on the peace process (and on the ‘defense of the public’). On their website, calling “everyone to the streets” they note the importance of defending the peace process against the “most obtuse” elements in the national debate.

The Marcha also recognises the important role of the Mayor of Bogotá, Gustavo Petro, in elevating the importance of the event and its relevance to the national conversation about peace and the process. Petro told local radio that he thinks the march has the possibility of being a “great leap needed by the process.”

Petro, considered a possible candidate for the Presidency in 2014 and an almost certain candidate for 2018, made his name as a congressman that fought for the rights of victims, after himself having taken up arms in the 1970s. It’s a canny move by him to identify himself, and direct substantial resources and political capital toward the march as it puts President Santos (his rival) in the position of standing by his side, and appearing to have ceded some of the political initiative to the controversial Mayor.

That President Santos only appears in the ninth paragraph of this article is an indication of how limited the Government’s efforts to mobilize support for the process have been. Santos, elected by many with the expectation of continuing the right-wing military-first-and-last strategy of his predecessor, Alvaro Uribe, has said to national media he will not “let anyone block our way” and that “everybody should support these attempts to reach peace.”

The ‘obtuse’ elements that may well ‘block the way’ are none other than Uribe himself who has accused the Marcha of being funded by the FARC (as has current Defense Minister, Pinzón) and made national media appearances calling for people not to march as the movement may use “the good faith” of citizens to endorse what he describes as a “combination of politics and terrorism.”

This confrontation between Uribe and Santos brings to a head many of the tensions that have been ongoing, as Uribe attempts to protect his “legacy” of fullfrontal war with the FARC, as well as to reject elements of what a feasible settlement may actually look like (such as land redistribution and the amnesty for actors on both sides.)

Amidst this political positioning it’s difficult to portend how well Santos and the Government will be able to bridge to their unlikely allies on the left. Facebook profile pics among the North Bogota moderates have started to change to “My contribution is belief: I believe in peace” but it’s yet to be seen whether they should believe that Santos is capable of delivering it.

For now the polarization in Colombia appears to continue apace.

by

Petro showing “mental confusion”: Polo Democrats´ Suarez

gustavopetro_1358344546

A key member the Polo Democratic Alternative Party (PDA) moved to further distance the party from Bogota’s controversial mayor Gustavo Petro and his administration on Sunday in an interview with El Espectador.

Aurelio Suarez, a former Bogotá mayoral candidate for the party who stood against Petro in 2011, said a prominent reason for the setbacks the Petro administration has suffered in its first year in office are due to the “mental confusion” of the mayor. He claimed that Petro “doesn’t know what he wants and what he can do in the existing institutional framework to advance programmes”.

Suarez emphasised that the Petro administration had an “incredible capacity to do unreasonable things” and that fundamental elements of the administration “cannot be categorised as of the left”. He cited the administration’s support for public-private partnerships as evidence of this, as well as criticising the introduction of a number of new taxes in the city since Petro came to power in 2011.

Suarez’s comments reveal a fear of the PDA that as a party of the Left they risk being associated with the incompetence and controversy that surrounds the Petro regime. Indeed, they point to a broader problem that the Left faces in Colombia in that parties pitching for a more moderate position are often associated in with the array of extreme elements that exist in the country. Petro himself used to belong to the PDA but left under a cloud when the party decided – in certain measure – to stick by the then disgraced Bogotá mayor, Samuel Moreno. Petro has since set up his own party, the Progressives, but as Suarez admitted in the interview, sections of the society still link Petro back to the PDA.

The PDA face a fight for survival at the congressional elections next year. Although their senate list leader is the popular Jorge Enrique Robledo, there is a real possibility that the party will not reach the appropriate percentage of the national vote to secure seats in the parliament. Clara López, recently confirmed as the party´s presidential candidate in 2014, has a job to do to position the PDA in a packed field, and to present a reasonable and voting winning face of the left. Any association with the hugely unpopular Petro must be avoided at all costs.

With old friends like these….

by

Petro the “Hugo Chávez” of Colombia

petrocolorbog

Bogotá Mayor Gustavo Petro´s disastrous move to nationalize the city´s garbage collection last month is to be examined by the highest courts in the land.

The nation´s second most powerful politician is set to face possible sanction for the move which left Colombia´s capital swimming in uncollected rubbish over the Christmas holiday period.

Petro reacted with fury this morning, labelling the attorney´s announcement an attempted coup d´état, and even a threat to the peace process with the FARC.

Petro, in a series of tweets, called on the “people” to “take to the streets” in a “mass mobilization” to defend his government against the “political interests” of those attempting to “sabotage the peace process” and cause an “institutional coup”.

For Petro the legal investigation into his woeful handling of the new waste collection service is not a simple move to challenge his lack of administrative skills, but instead an outright threat to Bogotá from the “mafia”.

Has Petro lost the plot?

Frankly, the former M-19 guerrilla´s behaviour appears increasingly erratic as he struggles to govern Colombia´s capital city a year into his mandate.

The Economist magazine has labelled Petro “arrogant” while others suggest he is paranoid and hopelessly unprepared for high office. Nestor Morales, of the influential BluRadio, this morning drew the similarity between Petro´s populism and Venezuela President Hugo Chávez´s style of government.

Morales appeared exasperated at the latest twist in what has been an unhappy 12 months in the life of Bogotá´s politics, reacting with indignation at the mayor´s attempt to cast those who criticize him as mafiosos, and opponents of the peace process.

Since coming to power in January 2012, Petro has polarized the city, seeming to seek to pitch rich against poor, private industry against the public, in a series of aggressive policy decisions that borrow from the Bolivarian rhetoric of the Venezuelan leader.

Moves are underway to collect the necessary signatures to remove Petro from office. And although this initiative is not supported by the political class, and (as we stand) has little chance of success, there is a very real prospect that the multiple legal challenges to his authority (currently underway or soon to begin) will land Petro in sufficient hot water to leave him incapacitated, unable to govern.

One thing is clear – whether Petro stays or goes – Bogotá will not survive three more years of this zero-sum battle between the mayor, the city, and the political class.

Few doubt that there are those out to get Petro. But frankly the city is more important than one man. Petro must get on with the job or he must hand over the reigns of power.

Category: Bogotá, Comment
by

How to prevent another Mayor Gustavo Petro

A Colombian casts his ballot during legislative elections in Bogota

Colombian Senator Juan Lozano this month launches a campaign to change the way mayors are elected in Colombia’s cities, helping to prevent future victories for leaders as unpopular as Bogotá’s Gustavo Petro.

Lozano will present a new bill “as soon as congress returns”, which if passed, would force candidates to face a “second round run-off” should they fail to secure more than 45% of the vote. Petro famously won only a third of the votes in the 2010 Bogotá race, as a slew of establishment candidates split the field. Had Petro needed to face a head-to-head battle he would almost certainly have lost, as candidates coalesced in opposition to his controversial brand of government.

Were Lozano’s plans to get the go ahead from parliamentarians, eight mayoral races are expected to be affected, although as population rises continue, this number has the potential to increase in future years.

Senator Lozano believes this legislation is necessary to avoid the concentration of power in the unelectable. According to the once president of Juan Manuel Santos’ U Party,  the changes will force candidates to present government programmes that have appeal beyond their “base”. In the case of Petro, for example, it is often argued that he has failed to govern for the whole of Bogotá, choosing instead to concentrate on what he considers to be his natural supporters. As a result, Petro has polarized the capital when a strong and uniting leadership is required after years of woeful administration.

In an interview with the newspaper El Tiempo, Lozano also revealed his bill will include a provision for a revision of the constitution to permit the re-election of mayors and governors. Under current laws, such regional politicians are restricted to one, four-year term. Lozano believes that, following the amendment applied in 2006 to allow the then President Alvaro Uribe to fight for a second period in office, there is little logic in limiting the nation’s second-tier leaders the same opportunity.

For Colombia Politics, Lozano’s measures are welcome improvements to what is essentially an anti-democratic status quo. It is, at least on a philosophical level, against the principles of democracy to prevent the electorate from keeping in power a successful and popular politician.

It is also the case that the prospect of re-election is often what drives politicians to respond to and represent better their voters. Nothing sharpens the mind quite like the spectre of an ignominious and humiliating defeat at the polls. Politicians who have at least one eye on keeping the electorate on side tend to do a better job. We as voters too will be more demanding of our leaders if we feel we have to live with them for possibly eight years.

And as for Petro…the campaign to revoke his mandate is under way. The mayor’s unpopularity is almost unparalleled, and he has only been in power for a year. Why? Quite simply, Petro is as far removed as it is possible from the idea of a centrist administrator who governs for the whole of the city.

Lozano is right to point to the short comings in Colombia’s democracy. Had his law been in place beforehand, perhaps Bogotá would have been spared the divisive Gustavo Petro, and the capital would have in power a leader determined to work for all, not just the few.

Category: Democracy, News Review
by

Petro government blame officials for Bogota trash shambles

5706516debb6747845c5cbedb073e726_zpse5aec8dc

Is Bogotá Mayor Gustavo Petro’s administration shifting blame for the fiasco of the city’s new garbage collection service onto the officials charged with its operation?

It certainly seemed so when Petro’s Health Secretary Guillermo Jaramillo was dispatched to the airwaves yesterday to call for Aguas Bogotá chief Diego Bravo to resign.

Bravo is a former hand-in-glove collaborator of the mayor but for Jaramillo the chaos of the first days of the city’s new waste disposal system is his fault, and perhaps his fault alone

… et tu, Petro?

On 18 December Petro kicked out the private operators who had collected the over 7,000 daily tonnes of rubbish, “nationalizing” the service and placing it in the hands of those he is now forcing out of office.

Petro’s ability to govern Bogotá has been called into question following a catastrophic start to this new system. The mayor has failed to ensure Aguas Bogota have at their disposal the most basic of infrastructure – the dust cars themselves.

Improvisation, poor planning and a total absence of administrative control have been blamed for the depressing scenes of Colombia’s capital awash with the uncollected detritus of household, hospital and industrial waste.

For many Bogotanos Petro’s flagship policy is not only unnecessary – why fix what aint broke? – it is also imprudent and inexplicably poorly executed.

For the mayor’s detractors then, it will seem more than a little rich that Petro appears to be hiding behind his officials.

Health Sec Jaramillo will face accusations of shameless scape goating by calling on Diego Bravo to go. Jaramillo claimed Bravo “fooled” Petro, providing “less than truthful information” about Aguas Bogotá’s plan. So according to Jaramillo, Petro is guilt free, a man let down by those around him rather than a source of blame himself?

Meanwhile Petro, on holiday until after the New Year festivities are out-of-the-way, continues to defend his plan despite the farce of the last ten days.

News emerged today that the dilapidated vehicles Petro has been forced to loan from New York could be prevented from arriving in Bogotá because of their poor state of repair. Pictures of the ancient and rusting trucks have dismayed the 8 million residents who anxiously await their deployment.

The city is traditionally quiet over Christmas and New Year as many desert the streets for the beaches. The fear is that once work resumes and Bogotá springs back into life the government will have failed to resolve a problem of its own making.

That Bravo’s head should roll is perhaps cause of little controversy, but Bogotanos will not be hoodwinked into thinking he is the real culprit.

Category: Bogotá, Comment
by

Gustavo Petro, a political biography

image

Gustavo Petro is perhaps Colombia’s most vocal, visible and determinedly anti-establishment politician. From his youth onwards, Petro has made a political career of denouncing and preventing the Colombian establishment’s power abuses, constantly challenging the status-quo.

Petro, elected Bogotá mayor in 2011, was born in rural Ciénaga de Oro, Cordoba department, in 1960. His early childhood was humble and rural; both his parents were poor farmers.

Seeking a better future, Petro’s family decided to migrate to the more prosperous Colombian inland village of Zipaquirá – just north of Bogotá during the 1970’s. It was there, that Petro finished high school at Colegio Nacional de La Salle (the same school attended by Colombian Nobel laureate Gabriel García Márquez).

After graduation, and aged 17, Petro joined the political arm of the rebel armed group M-19. Petro, like his comrades, was reacting to the supposed fraudulent victory of Misael Pastrana over Gustavo Rojas Pinilla in the 1970 presidential election.

As a member of M-19, Petro quickly established a profile as a prominent and intellectual politico. Petro used the different political posts he went on to occupy in Zipaquirá to position himself as a daring and different leader, giving milk bottles to the poor, and leading the initiative to see refugees displaced by violence occupying wealthy landowners’ properties.

Petro has been historically attached to M-19’s well-known acts of violence (including much publicized kidnappings), and the infamous Palace of Justice Seige (Toma al Palacio de Justicia). This siege with its large number of casualties, disappearances, and resulting impunity for the perpetrators has become one of Colombia’s most emblematic tragedies.

After the siege, Petro used his influence within M-19 to promote peace talks with the government, helping to bring about the eventual dismantling of M-19 in 1990, and the subsequent amnesty for its members.

After full re-incorporation into civilian life, Petro was elected representative for Cundinamarca in 1991. He was then a member of the Alianza Democrática M-19 party.

Three years later, Petro was appointed as to a diplomatic role in Belgium, under the Samper administration.  The continuous death threats he received were an influential factor in his accepting the diplomatic post.

Back in Colombia, and after an ill-fated attempt in the 1996 Bogotá mayoral election, Petro was once again elected representative in 1998. This time for the Bogotá constituency.  It was during this second term in Congress, that Petro began to establish a reputation for being a thorn in the side of the Colombian political establishment.

His first cause was whistle-blowing dodgy funding of politicians’ election campaigns (a theme he would return to in later years). He was also recognized for exposing corruption scandals involving private banks, as well as the infamous case of the public hospital, San Juan de Dios.

In 2002, Petro was re-elected as a representative, with the highest number of votes received by any candidate in that election. Furthermore, it was during that term in office that Petro’s popularity catapulted, mainly for exposing notorious corruption scandals concerning ex-president Alvaro Uribe’s political allies.

Petro’s political opposition to Uribe’s 2002-2006 term in office was fierce. Perhaps his most celebrated act was uncovering the Parapolítica scandal that shocked the nation, and the international community alike (Parapolitics referred to the covert alliance between terrorist paramilitary organizations and politicians and public servants). Petro also campaigned hard against Uribe’s constitutional reform in favor of presidential re-election.

During 2005, Petro joined forces with a large number of opposition politicians to form the, then new, Polo Democrático Alternativo (PDA) party. By 2006, the party, along with Petro, had won popular support and recognition. Petro easily secured the jump from representative to senator in the 2006 congressional elections.

Once again, Petro stood out for his unrelenting opposition to Alvaro Uribe’s policies. As Petro grew his reputation at the national level, as well as inside his own party, his first presidential candidacy (2010) began to take shape.

His campaigning intentions crystalized when he beat traditional left strongman Carlos Gaviria for the PDA presidential nomination – Gaviria had been a previous presidential candidate for the left and Petro’s emergence was a surprise for some.

Petro’s 2010 campaign ended after he finished third behind current president Juan Manuel Santos and wildcard Green Party candidate Antanas Mockus.

After his failed presidential endeavor, Petro focused on Bogotá. He began by denouncing the public contracting of fellow PDA party members Samuel Moreno (then Bogotá mayor) and his brother Senator Ivan Moreno. Scandal ensued, and thanks to Petro, citizens realized the true magnitude of corruption.

Inside the PDA, the situation became untenable, and Petro decided to opt out and form his own party, Progresistas. Running, for Progresistas Petro won the 2011 Bogotá mayoral election defeating Enrique Peńalosa and Gina Parody.

As the current mayor of Bogotá, it seems that now it is Petro’s turn to face aggressive opposition. He has been accused of improvisation in policy (particularly public sanitation), and a lack of management skills, and experience. Petro’s political life has been in opposition, and his critics suggest he has been unable to adapt to the rigors of administration.

Petro has responded to this criticism with the claim he is persecuted by mafias – the term he uses to describe establishment interests. Petro argues these mafia are seeking to sabotage his term as Bogotá mayor in order to minimize his chances for a future presidency.

Petro’s character has earned him a reputation for being stubborn and arrogant; however it is also precisely this character that has led him to face down the most powerful groups in Colombian politics, despite constant death threats. Petro’s determined attachment to legality (after being granted amnesty) is also well known, not only from his constant attacks on corruption, but also from his many rejections of bribery proposals.

A year into his mayoralty, Petro continues to polarize opinion. The vast majority of the Bogotá electorate are against his administration, but he has a fiercely loyal core support.

Category: Profiles
by

“Discipline Petro”, Ombudsman

basuras_seis_zpse0271ce9

Colombia’s Ombudsman has today filed a request with the nation’s inspector general to begin disciplinary hearings against Bogota Mayor Gustavo Petro.

Jorge Armando Otálora, the “Defensor del Pueblo” confirmed in the early hours of the morning he had moved to bring Petro’s actions, which he considers to be a threat to the health of Bogotanos, to the attention of the recently re-elected top prosecutor Alejandro Ordonez.

Otalora has labelled Petro’s “improvisation” amid the troubled start of the new garbage collection model which yesterday plunged Bogota into chaos “gravely” unacceptable.

The Ombudsman accuses Petro of failing in his duty to protect “the fundamental rights” of Bogota’s eight million souls and has asked the authorities to step in to protect the city.

The mayor’s new plan to place refuse collection in the hands of the public sector has been roundly criticized for its lack of operational robustness, its lack of planning and its woeful execution on day one.

Bizarrely the mayor has failed to ensure Aguas Bogota, the subsidiary of the city’s state-run aqueduct in charge of the new operation, the delivery of the dust carts necessary to patrol the city’s streets.

Aguas Bogota must wait months until new carts are delivered and in the meantime has sent for reinforcements from New York.

In a further twist, these borrowed trucks will not arrive until the end of the year leaving Aguas Bogota yesterday to adopt drastic measures, rolling out a makeshift and apparently illegal float of vehicles in its first day of operations.

The Ombudsman has indicated it will take action against the mayor for the use of these vehicles which he argued placed the lives of workers at risk.

Meanwhile President Santos has indicated that if the plan continues to flounder he will, within days, step in.

The Ombudsman when asked whether he should wait before lodging the official complaint argued that the legal statutes state that a governor is responsible for his actions as soon as he begins to execute them. It is a legal decision, he argues, based on a dereliction of duty and a lack of planning that threatens the livelihood, security and health of the capital’s population.

Petro also looks set to lose today his right hand man, Guillermo Asprilla who appears to have been kicked out by Inspector General Alejandro Ordonez and preventing from occupying public office for up to 12 years.

Less than a year into his government Petro is hanging on for dear life. Bogotanos are today asking when he will start to govern.

Category: Bogotá, News Review
by

Why I’m not supporting the campaign to kick Petro out of office

gustavo-petro

I am a fierce critic of Bogota Mayor Gustavo Petro. I think his government has failed. I think his government has divided the capital when we looked for unity and harmony after the disastrous Samuel Moreno regime.

As Petro stood proud on the day of his inauguration he promised us a “politics of love” but he now stands accused of pitching poor against rich, private industry against public and state owned institutions, of even picking fights with his closest aides who have left his government in droves over this long 11 months since he walked through the door to the Leivano Palace. In short, Petro has shown us a politics whose qualities are closer to hatred than to love.

Petro has spent a life time as an opposition politician, and he seems unwilling to let go of this attack dog mentality. Sadly, our mayor seems incapable of administrating with maturity or competence.

I was not one of the mere 30% who voted for him last year, but I was willing to give him a chance.

But Petro has gone out of way to alienate rather than to win over his critics. There is very little sense that the mayor governs for the whole of Bogota; those who voted against him have been shunned, and ignored.

So it is little surprise that there are those who feel Petro is unfit to run Bogota. Congressman Miguel Gomez of the President’s U Party even believes the mayor should be forced from office. This month Gomez officially launched the campaign to dispose the mayor via an article in the 1991 constitution which permits the revocation of a mandate through popular support.

In January, Gomez will start the process of collecting the 280,000 signatures necesary to take the campaign forward. If he clears this hurdle the movement must encourage 55% of the number of those who voted in the last mayoral election (approx. 1,234,000) to mark yes in a ballot on the revocation. So, around 617,000 “si” votes are needed.

With Petro’s unpopularity higher than 60% it does not sound that too far fetched. However, no mayor has been deposed via this article since it was first introduced in 1994.

What appears certain is that Bogota must endure a long, arduous and bitter campaign.

Although Petro has been – until now – a calamitous mayor, I will not join the campaign to oust him from office and here’s five reasons why:

Like him or loath him, Petro was democratically elected. And elected to serve a full four year term.

With peace talks ongoing in which we are promising the FARC an opportunity to demobilize and enter politics it is less than helpful for them to see a former guerrilla, Petro, forcibly removed from office.

The first year of any mayor is difficult. Until September, Petro’s administration was effectively delivering what Samuel Moreno had planned. The outgoing mayor’s plan – whereever you are in Colombia – runs for around 9 months after the boss has left office. Petro has only had a question of months implementing his vision for the city.

Why should Bogota lose another year of government while the mayor defends himself against these attacks? The district authority has been paralized for too long, and has delivered too little over far too many years. How would Bogota benefit from a further period of schlerotic non-management? Bogota does not want a mayor who spends his time fighting opponents while the transport network grinds to a hault and the rubbish piles up on the streets and in the parks.

The revocation helps no one but the extremists. A fight of this kind helps Petro. We know that the mayor wants to run again for president of the republic. A campaign by the right will do him good, will allow him to position himself as the voice of the poor and the destitute, the white knight pitched against the overbearing power of the mafioso right. We must not let Petro present himself as a savior, as Bogota’s Evita – for he is not!

Yes, Bogota deserves and demands better than the mayor we have. But Bogota also deserves a politics based in serious administration of the very real problems that face our city. We do not want a polemicized “them versus us” debate, we do not want to give the mayor the opportunity to fight against the “paramilitary mafia” as he labels it.

We want Petro to get on with the very difficult job he has. We want Petro to stop fighting and to start governing. We want a Bogota based on progression not on regression and class warfare.

I do not support Petro’s government, but no I don’t support moves to remove him just a year after he was elected.

This article was written for Colombia Reports.

Category: Bogotá, Comment