The state of democracy in the Americas

Although most countries in the Americas have continued to perform in the mid-range across the four main categories of democracy, the region has experienced greater democratic contraction than expansion in the past five years

Close

Case Study: Brazil

Maria Santillana

Introduction

On 8 January 2023, Brazil experienced ‘the most serious attack on state institutions since its return to democracy in 1985’ (Souto 2023). In an assault with alarming parallels to the 6 January 2021 attack on the Capitol in the United States, supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro stormed government buildings (Sullivan and Glen 2023), claiming the election had been fraudulent. This assault, which came months after Bolsonaro lost the election to President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, has been attributed to Bolsonaro’s spread of election misinformation, toxic polarization and rising extremism (Salomón 2022). Like former US President Donald Trump, Bolsonaro frequently cast doubt on the legitimacy of the Brazilian electoral system, claiming without evidence that it was prone to fraud, especially regarding the electronic voting system (Al Jazeera 2022b; Santos 2022; Nicas, Milhorance and Ionova 2022). Bolsonaro issued a statement on social media condemning the riots and rejecting allegations of his involvement (Bolsonaro 2023; Millard 2023).

Rights performance in Brazil, 2012 to 2022

Source

Global State of Democracy Indices, v.7.1, International IDEA, 2023, <https://www.idea.int/data-tools/tools/global-state-democracy-indices>, accessed 17 October 2023.

The 8 January attacks were the culmination of Bolsonaro’s efforts to destabilize democracy during his presidency (2019–2022), which was characterized by attempts to weaken core institutions, including electoral bodies, civil society, the media, and law enforcement agencies. The Bolsonaro tenure did have an impact, as seen in declining Global State of Democracy (GSoD) Indices scores in Credible Elections and Personal Integrity and Security. Waning performance in the Rights category is also notable, with significant declines across Access to Justice, Social Group Equality, and Civil Liberties, particularly Freedom of Expression, and Freedom of Association and Assembly (Figure 1). These declines are part of a broader decade-long negative trend and illustrate the democratic decline in Brazil.

Challenges to Brazil’s democracy under the Bolsonaro administration

Despite the long-established use of electronic voting in Brazil, a system widely regarded as trustworthy (Goldsmith and Ruthrauff 2013; Abel 2018; Audi 2022), the former president cast doubt on its integrity (Muggah 2021; Jeantet and Bridi 2022). Bolsonaro even introduced a bill advocating for printed ballots, largely deemed as an effort to sow uncertainty ahead of the 2022 election. In March 2022, Bolsonaro’s supporters demonstrated in São Paulo to echo the narrative of election fraud (Stuenkel 2022).

Bolsonaro enacted policies that significantly eroded civic space. Anti-discrimination measures and the protection of Indigenous peoples were negatively impacted, as specialized agencies were weakened, their funding cut, and mining was encouraged in protected lands in the Amazon (Smith 2020; HRW 2021; Roper 2021; Fishman 2022). The former president’s handling of the Covid-19 pandemic was widely criticized due to high fatality rates, his government’s spreading of misinformation, downplaying its severity, and an approach that framed the pandemic as a security issue instead of a public health emergency; military officers with no public health experience took on high-level posts in the Health Ministry (Pfrimer and Barbosa 2020; Akkoyunlu and Lima 2022). This contributed to erode trust in the country’s specialized institutions (Zimmermann 2021; Heuser 2021).

Anti-discrimination measures and the protection of Indigenous peoples were negatively impacted, as specialized agencies were weakened, their funding cut, and mining was encouraged in protected lands in the Amazon.

Bolsonaro sought the concentration of executive power, often using social media to attack justices he criticized as obstructive to his agenda and to incite his followers against the judiciary and legislature (Werneck Arguelhes 2022). A notable instance was when, during a social media broadcast, he expressed discontent over the Supreme Court’s investigation into fake news in Brazil. He labelled the probe as unconstitutional, and attempts to curb fake news as a threat to freedom of speech (Reuters 2020).

The resilience of countervailing institutions in Brazil

Congress and the judiciary

Brazil’s democratic resilience can be attributed to its strong system of checks and balances. With power effectively distributed among branches of government, there are standards of accountability that prevent the concentration of power (Melo and Pereira 2013).

The National Congress was able to withstand efforts to change the voting system, rebuffing unfounded allegations about its vulnerability to tampering. In August 2023, for example, it rejected Bolsonaro’s initiative, thanks to a strong opposition that had expressed concern about the increased cost, complexity, and potential for vote-buying or coercion associated with a printed receipt system (Boadle 2021; Hanley 2021; Iglesias and Carvalho 2021; Jeantet and Bridi 2022).

The Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF), Brazil’s Supreme Court, is a central pillar in the country’s judiciary, and its structure offers several safeguards against undue influence. Its 11 justices are appointed for life, allowing decision making free from political pressures. Appointments require presidential nomination and Senate approval, ensuring multiparty agreement. While lacking an internal comptroller, the Court operates under checks and balances, with each justice able to review colleagues’ decisions. Its broad jurisdiction and constitutional interpretation authority further fortify its independence. The STF has taken an active role in defending its ability to regulate executive power. In a notable move in 2019, the STF granted itself the authority to initiate investigations into attacks on its operations without prior prosecutorial action, even amidst criticism for potential overreach. This decision came in response to constant misinformation and attacks on its work and justices, leading to the initiation of the ‘fake news inquiry’ (Globo 2021), which was defended as necessary to safeguard the constitutional order. Moreover, the STF’s broad competencies allow it to consider many cases, reinforcing its role as a guardian of Brazil’s constitutional order. However, these actions have raised questions about the balance of power in Brazil’s democratic system, highlighting the complex dynamics between the branches of government (Nicas and Spigariol 2022).

The STF has taken an active role in defending its ability to regulate executive power. In a notable move in 2019, the STF granted itself the authority to initiate investigations into attacks on its operations without prior prosecutorial action, even amidst criticism for potential overreach.

The STF has continued to issue milestone judgments on subjects such as academic freedom, civil society participation and Indigenous rights, in many cases rejecting Bolsonaro’s interpretation of the Constitution (STF 2019). During the pandemic, the STF played a pivotal role in maintaining public health and enforcing shared governance across the federal states in response strategies, notably suspending any state propaganda disseminating misinformation (STF 2021). Crucially, it rejected Bolsonaro’s claim that article 142 of the Constitution allowed for military intervention in government branches (Peluso Neder Meyer and Bustamante 2020).

Brazil’s top Electoral Tribunal, the Tribunal Superior Eleitoral (TSE), plays a pivotal role in preserving the integrity, transparency and fairness of the country’s electoral process. The TSE is composed of justices from various organs of the judiciary and notable jurists, which strengthens its institutional credibility. Throughout the 2022 electoral process, the TSE effectively managed appeals, enforced electoral norms and certified results, while addressing allegations of fraud. The TSE also upheld strict electoral regulations concerning campaign financing and political advertisements, ensuring fair competition among candidates (Green 2022; Reuters 2022). Moreover, the TSE collaborated efficiently with a range of stakeholders, including social media platforms, to mitigate the impact of disinformation during the election period (Biller 2023; Regattieri 2023). Prior to the election, the TSE launched a Program on Countering Disinformation, which was instrumental in ensuring the credibility and smooth running of the electoral process (Campos Mello 2022; TSE 2022).

The TSE is composed of justices from various organs of the judiciary and notable jurists, which strengthens its institutional credibility.

Significantly, the decision to bar Bolsonaro from public office for eight years demonstrated the judiciary’s effectiveness as a safeguard for accountability, citing his remarks discrediting Brazil’s electoral system (Nicas 2023). Following the anti-democratic protests in January 2023, prosecutors initiated a federal investigation into Bolsonaro’s involvement, extending the probe to other key figures implicated in the unrest. The arrest of Anderson Torres, Bolsonaro’s former justice minister, on evidence of a planned far-right coup further illustrates Brazilian institutions’ ability to uphold the rule of law (Al Jazeera 2023).

Media and civil society: A safeguard against authoritarianism

Despite Bolsonaro’s frequent attacks on the press, Brazilian media has maintained its independence, resisting government interference. Media outlets provided thorough and balanced coverage of pivotal events, such as those on 8 January 2023, debunking disinformation disseminated by Bolsonaro, especially on social media platforms, where he sought renewed legitimacy for his divisive rhetoric, and publicizing violations of free speech and access to information (Wirtschafter and Piccone 2023; Caeiro 2021). The media has also been key in exposing corruption scandals across several administrations, thereby increasing public pressure on the government and contributing to accountability (Article 19 2023; RSF 2022).

Brazil’s civil society organizations have been instrumental in protecting democracy (Abers, Rossi and von Bülow 2021; Harris and Pooler 2022; Lacerda 2023; Aguiar Aguilar 2023). Public demonstrations against the January riots signalled citizens’ demand for respect of the rule of law; meanwhile, activists have been denouncing policies that discriminate against Indigenous populations and risk their lands, the environment and their livelihoods (Fishman 2021; Watson 2023; Al Jazeera 2022a; Kahn 2023). Their activism included challenging a draft bill imposing an arbitrary cut-off date for Indigenous land rights, which underlines civil society’s role in countering discriminatory legislation (Bruce 2023; HRW 2023).

Navigating the road ahead: Challenges and opportunities

Brazil’s democratic institutions have shown remarkable resilience and effectiveness in countering attempts to centralize executive authority and erode democracy. Their commitment to transparency, accountability and the rule of law has been key in preserving Brazil’s democratic fabric. However, significant challenges persist, including ensuring the respect for rights, including freedom of expression, while countering misinformation. Political polarization, corruption and inequality should also be prioritized after a decade of democratic declines. Investing in education and social welfare, and fostering a culture of dialogue and compromise, among other efforts, will safeguard Brazil’s democratic progress and mitigate the risks of autocratic leaders (Bradlow and Kadivar 2023).

Abbreviations
  • GSoD: Global State of Democracy
  • STF: Supremo Tribunal Federal
  • TSE: Tribunal Superior Eleitoral
References
Acknowledgements

This case study was written by Maria Santillana with contributions/input from Miguel Angel Lara Otaola, Nicolás Liendo and Maria Angeles Morales.

Key Findings

  1. There has been a continuing decline in democratic principles throughout the Americas. More countries are now low-performing in all categories of democratic performance than five years ago, albeit that a majority continue to perform in the mid-range.

  2. Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela have shown the most significant declines. But there have also been recent and rapid falls in performance in El Salvador and Guatemala.

  3. In some Central and South American countries, including Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico and Peru, leaders have resorted to increased militarization and ‘states of exception’ as a way to address violent crime, with negative knock-on effects on the performance of Rights and Rule of Law categories. This has particularly affected Civil Liberties, and Personal Integrity and Security.

  4. Suppression of the press, of freedom of expression, and of freedom of association and assembly are all worsening. In 2022, 10 countries in the Americas region experienced notable declines in Freedom of Expression, Freedom of the Press, or Freedom of Association and Assembly; in 2017, the number was seven countries.

  5. The Americas performed strongly in Representation, with 78 per cent of countries registering high performance for Elected Government, which measures the extent to which national, governing offices are filled through elections.

Introduction

Over the last five years, while most countries in the Americas have continued to perform in the mid-range across the four main categories of democracy (Figure 4.1), the region has experienced greater democratic contraction than expansion. The number of low-performing countries increased, and more countries experienced significant declines than experienced advances in Representation, Rights, Rule of Law and Participation (six countries declined and only three advanced).

Performance in the Americas is mostly mid-range (distribution of scores in GSoD categories in the Americas 2018–2022)

Source

International IDEA, The Global State of Democracy Indices v7.1, 2023.

In recent years, elected leaders in the Americas have eroded democracy, with state institutions being used to legitimize restrictions on rights, civic space and electoral competition. In a region where civic engagement has been critical to enact change, restrictions on civil society participation are particularly worrying. This is the case in countries, such as Guatemala and El Salvador, where the democratic performance is mostly mid-range and low.

As shown in Figure 4.2, the breadth of declines in El Salvador and Guatemala have a particular impact on the work of countervailing institutions, which can be evidenced by executive harassment and prosecution of anti-corruption officials, media and civil society (Maldonado 2023; El País 2023a; OHCHR 2023a). Most recently, decisions by Guatemalan courts and prosecutors prior to and following the presidential race’s first-round electoral results were criticized by experts as unwarranted and possible electoral interference (Abbott 2023a, 2023b).

El Salvador and Guatemala have experienced broad declines (selected factors)

Source

International IDEA, The Global State of Democracy Indices v7.1, 2023.

The state of democracy

Representation

Most countries in the Americas score strongly in Representation, with 13 countries featuring among the top 50 in the world. Chile (ranked at 4), Uruguay (9) and Costa Rica (13) rank in the top 20 globally. In the last five years, however, only Ecuador (53) has seen advances in its Representation scores. Nevertheless, political violence, accusations of corruption and the president’s recent dissolution of Congress will likely impact Ecuador’s score in the years to come (Mella 2023; Rico 2023).

El Salvador (95), Guyana (87) and Haiti (157) have experienced significant declines in Representation, with the first dropping six places in the rankings in one year. Declines in Credible Elections have also occurred in high-performing countries that rank in the top 50 of Representation, such as Brazil (45) and Costa Rica (13).

In the case of Brazil, although electoral authorities proved resilient and provided certainty during the 2022 general elections, a contentious campaign and toxic polarization culminated in riotous protests in January 2023. Supporters of defeated President Jair Bolsonaro claimed election fraud, arguably because of their candidate’s refusal to concede (Nicas 2023a) (see also the case study on Brazil).

The introduction of the so-called ‘Plan B’ electoral reform of Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador—which, among other issues, would have cut funding for the national electoral body—has also tested the resilience of CIs and their role as guarantors of credible elections. The country’s Supreme Court struck it down due to significant irregularities during the legislative process (Raziel 2023).

In the USA, reports of harassment of election officials in the weeks prior to the mid-term elections point to the risks that polarized campaigns can bring (see also the case study on the USA).

Peru, despite its relatively stable scores, has suffered a crisis of representation and political parties, with the attempted self-coup by former President Pedro Castillo a standout. Public disapproval rates of both the government (at 80 per cent) and parliament (91 per cent) (IEP 2023) are extremely high, as is the public perception that the country is not governed for the benefit of citizens (86 per cent) (Latinobarómetro 2021). Overall, 91 per cent of people are not satisfied with their democracy in Peru (Latinobarómetro 2023).

In the Americas, weariness over continued economic volatility and corruption scandals have resulted in distrust of political elites and dissatisfaction with representative democratic institutions, particularly political parties and parliaments.

In 2023, only 48 per cent of people in Latin America said that they support democracy (Latinobarómetro 2023). Dissatisfaction has contributed to the rise of populist leaders, and fragmented and polarized political systems that aim to respond to discontent but have failed to maintain democracy (Casas-Zamora 2023; Latinobarómetro 2021).

Rights

As seen in Figures 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5, performance in the Rights category remains largely in the mid-range. In total, 15 out of the 27 countries in the Americas are in the mid-range, with half of the region performing below the global average.

Nicaragua is the only country to have experienced notable declines in the Rights category overall. This is due to President Daniel Ortega’s government cracking down on opposition and dissent, including retaliation against members of the Catholic Church and the media. The expulsion and arbitrary deprivation of nationality of hundreds of Nicaraguans highlights the extent of the human rights crisis in the country (OHCHR 2023d; Chamorro 2023), which is currently the lowest ranking country from the region in this category (ranked at 164).

Over the last five years, the most significant and widespread declines in the Rights category have occurred in Civil Liberties, including Freedom of Expression (six countries declined), Freedom of the Press (seven countries declined) and Freedom of Association and Assembly (five countries declined). The use of force against demonstrators in Cuba (Amnesty International 2022) and the harassment, intimidation and closure of news outlets and journalists in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua (Méndez Dardón and Silva Ávalos 2022) exemplify this worrying trend.

Performance in Rights, countries by percentage of regional population

Source

International IDEA, The Global State of Democracy Indices v7.1, 2023; United Nations Population Division, World Population Prospects: 2022 Revision.

Distribution of Rights performance across factors in the Americas, 2022

Source

International IDEA, The Global State of Democracy Indices v7.1, 2023.

Distribution of Rights scores across subregions of the Americas (median scores for subregions annotated)

Source

International IDEA, The Global State of Democracy Indices v7.1, 2023.

Social Group Equality is another area where democratic contraction has been notable (Figure 4.6), as Latin America and the Caribbean continues to underperform in inequality measurements in comparison with the rest of the world (Arreaza Coll 2023).

In the last five years, seven countries experienced significant declines in Social Group Equality, including high performers such as the USA (ranked at 28) and Canada (23), although they continue to rank in the top 30 countries globally in Rights.

Declines in the USA in Social Group Equality can be explained by the impact of structural racism and discrimination on political equality, alongside an array of other issues including poverty and racial profiling (OHCHR 2023g; OHCHR 2022; OHCHR 2018b).

Only Costa Rica (20), the highest country from the region in the rankings for Rights (Figure 4.5), and Uruguay (38), currently the sixth highest ranked country from the Americas in Rights, perform well in Social Group Equality.

Declines in Social Group Equality have been notable in the Americas, affecting even high-performing countries

Source

International IDEA, The Global State of Democracy Indices v7.1, 2023.

The inflation-led cost-of-living crisis in the region may have exacerbated inequality. This has further fostered discontent, as observed in increasing protests in Cuba over fuel and food shortages since last year, and the 2022 protests in Panama, the largest in decades (CIVICUS 2022). Malnutrition and food insecurity have particularly affected the Caribbean and South America; these hardships, along with rising interest rates and the devaluation of currencies in countries such as Colombia, Chile and Argentina will continue to challenge the region (Zovatto 2023).

In the last five years, Gender Equality overall remained stable and no countries experienced either significant declines or improvements. Most countries perform in the mid-range in Gender Equality (18 out of the 27 countries). However, in the USA recent state-level legislation and initiatives that weaken women’s rights and LGBTQIA+ rights could have an impact on the country’s performance in Gender Equality (New York Times 2023; ACLU 2023b) (see also the case study on the USA).

Rule of Law

Over the last five years, several countries in the Americas have seen volatility in their Rule of Law scores (Figure 4.7). Of the 27 countries in the region, 12 perform below the global average in this category.

On the plus side, the Dominican Republic (ranked at 86) has improved at the aggregate level since 2017. But the Rule of Law category and its associated factors have seen declines in countries with institutional shortcomings, such as El Salvador and Guatemala. The mid-range performers Peru and Brazil experienced declines in Absence of Corruption and Personal Integrity and Security, respectively. High performers also experienced some declines: Uruguay in Personal Integrity and Security, and Canada in Judicial Independence, but, as they are ranked at 24 and 15 respectively, they are still the top two performers from the region in the Rule of Law category rankings (Figure 4.8).

Advances and declines in Rule of Law in the Americas comparing 2017 to 2022

Source

International IDEA, The Global State of Democracy Indices v7.1, 2023.

Rule of Law rankings in the Americas, including changes from 2021 to 2022

Source

International IDEA, The Global State of Democracy Indices v7.1, 2023.

Insecurity remains a major challenge to the rule of law. Governments have failed to adequately address the root causes of increases in violent crime, and many have resorted to granting more power to the armed forces, increasing defence spending and expanding militarization in public security and migration, as well as administration of public services and parastatal entities (Manetto 2023; Barrientos 2023; Freeman and Rey 2023). This is the case in countries as diverse as Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico and Peru (Flores-Macias and Zarkin 2021; Amnesty International 2023).

Fatigue from long-standing problems of insecurity, corruption and economic exclusion, as well as polarizing rhetoric embraced by certain leaders, has contributed to some support for undemocratic governance at the expense of the rule of law, rights, and checks and balances. This approach has been followed by countries that face widespread security challenges.

El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele remains one of the most popular Latin American leaders, despite the incarceration of tens of thousands of people and due process violations, undertaken as part of his government’s strategy against gangs (Kitroeff 2023).

Leaders from diverse political affiliations but with common security challenges, such as Presidents Xiomara Castro in Honduras, Dina Boluarte in Peru and Guillermo Lasso in Ecuador, as well as Prime Minister Andrew Holness in Jamaica, have also turned to deploying the military and to suspending rights while trying to counter crime or control migration (WOLA 2022; Cañizares 2023; Amnesty International 2023; Chappell and Ellsworth 2022). Such actions enable them to disregard the immediate oversight of formal CIs.

In the USA, Personal Integrity and Security has been affected by the increase in gun violence. Recent incidents, which include shootings that occurred because people mistakenly knocked on the wrong door or drove into the wrong driveway, mark a context in which ‘missteps’ can lead to death (Healy et al. 2023).

Countervailing institutions

CIs have taken many forms throughout the continent. The history of military dictatorships, as well as the political instability deriving from social unrest, conflict and paramilitary confrontations, has influenced regional priorities (Perina 2012) such that several democratizing countries have used their constitutional frameworks to provide strong traditional checks and balances between branches of government, and other fourth-branch institutions (Uprimny 2011).

Throughout the continent, regional and national protections for independent media and civil society have been progressively implemented, in acknowledgement of their ability to foster social change and constrain government excesses. In this sense, traditional checks and balances and other formal and informal CIs have played a substantial role in supporting democracy in the region. However, in the last five years, performance in the GSoD factors relating to CIs has tilted more towards contraction than growth (Figure 4.9).

Number of countries with significant advances and declines in factors relating to CIs in 2022 (compared with 2017)

Source

International IDEA, The Global State of Democracy Indices v7.1, 2023.

Supranational institutions as countervailing institutions

The inter-American human rights system has played an important role as a CI in the region by monitoring and promoting accountability for rights violations through its Commission, Court and rapporteurs. The regional Court’s rulings contributed to post-military transitional justice processes in Latin America, such as in the establishment of truth commissions after it was determined that amnesty laws were incompatible with the American Convention on Human Rights (Inter-American Court of Human Rights 2001, 2012; Inter-American Commission on Human Rights 2021). More recent examples include decisions on the incompatibility with the American Convention on Human Rights of mandatory death sentences in murder cases in Trinidad and Tobago, and the incompatibility with human rights of mandatory pre-trial detention in Mexico (Inter-American Court of Human Rights 2022, 2023). This makes the regional court a significant CI with the ability to ensure respect for rights.

Also at the regional level, the Organization of American States (OAS) has made important contributions to the promotion of democracy through electoral observation missions and the adoption of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Enforceability issues and persistent non-compliance by some countries that have opted to withdraw from multilateral diplomacy, however, point to a need to strengthen regional capacity to facilitate more consistent and regular follow-up for countries that are experiencing challenges. This approach is preferable to the use of the Inter-American Democratic Charter as a last-ditch effort to respond to democratic breakdown (International IDEA 2021). Regional experts have also proposed measures to increase the Charter’s efficiency, such as enabling the judiciary and legislative branches or even EMBs and civil society to request the OAS measures or field visits, and strengthening the Charter as an early-warning tool (Zovatto 2021; Mariani 2011).

Domestic institutions as countervailing institutions

Parliaments

Legislatures in the Americas have had mixed success in exercising oversight. In the USA, the US House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capital (January 6th Committee) recommended that former President Donald Trump be charged with federal crimes for his participation in attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential elections (Gardner, Helderman and Alemany 2022; January 6th Committee 2022). Although the findings were not binding on the Justice Department, the indictment in August 2023 of the former president on federal charges refers substantially to the Committee’s report and the evidence and testimony presented before it (Jurecic 2023). Partisan divide, and a shift in the composition of the US Congress after the 2022 mid-term elections, will also likely have an impact on the role of the legislature as a CI.

In Mexico, a Congress aligned mostly with the ruling party has paralysed the appointment of officials to oversight bodies that have been criticized by the executive (González 2023). It has also facilitated the fast-track adoption of legislative initiatives proposed by the president (Saldierna and Becerril 2023). Courts have had to act as a CI, considering accusations of legislative process violations or bills in opposition to the Constitution. This was the case with the decree by which the National Guard’s operation and administration had been placed under military command; it was invalidated after constitutional challenges (Suprema Corte de Justicia 2023).

The effectiveness of parliaments has also been weak (Figure 4.10), or come at the expense of stability, in contexts where the executive and parliament are led by opposing parties. This is particularly the case where the fragmentation of the political class and the proliferation of non-traditional parties requires leaders to either seek compromises to advance their priorities or risk confrontation (Freeman 2022).

In Peru, confrontation between branches of government included threats of impeachment even before former President Pedro Castillo took office (Del Aguila n.d.). The executive and legislative branches have distorted the use of balance of power mechanisms established in the Constitution, introducing high instability into the Peruvian political system and leading to a high turnover of leaders; in five years, the country has had six presidents. These mechanisms include provisions through which a presidential vacancy can be declared, on account of vaguely defined ‘moral incompetence’, and the executive can dissolve Congress if the legislature refuses approval of two proposals of councils of ministers.

Trends in Effective Parliament in the subregions of the Americas

Source

International IDEA, The Global State of Democracy Indices v7.1, 2023.

Judiciaries

Courts have been somewhat more successful in keeping leaderships in check across the Americas, especially in countries where judicial independence is strong.

In Costa Rica, the judiciary determined that the government had indirectly violated the freedom of the press by ordering the closure of an entertainment centre belonging to the same corporation as a newspaper critical of President Rodrigo Chaves Robles, a decision that has an impact on freedom of speech and media integrity (Benavides-Santos 2022; Sociedad Interamericana de Prensa 2022).

Mexico’s top court has issued relevant rulings to halt initiatives that further military power (OHCHR 2023e), despite confrontational rhetoric from the executive. It also invalidated the legal electoral reform presented by the President and passed by a Congress in which the ruling party is in the majority (‘Plan B’), due to serious violations of the legislative process (Raziel 2023).

In the USA, upcoming federal and state courts’ consideration of criminal charges and civil claims against former President Trump demonstrate their ability to act as a CI with regard to high-ranking officials.

In Brazil, judicial oversight of the elections was critical to containing misinformation in the midst of a polarized presidential campaign, although not without criticism for possible overreach (Galarraga-Gortazar 2022; Nicas 2023b).

Conversely, in countries with low performance in Judicial Independence and Predictable Enforcement, as well as with subservient courts, judiciaries have been inefficient as CIs. In Nicaragua, the judiciary has been ‘weaponized’ to crack down on dissidence through reprisals against political opposition, critics and their families (OHCHR 2023c).

Fourth-branch institutions, national human rights institutions, EMBs and elections

Independent and regulatory CIs also play an important role in checking power. These include fourth-branch institutions, such as electoral commissions, national human rights institutions (NHRIs) and the press, and other informal CIs like CSOs and social movements. With varying degrees of autonomy and independence, NHRIs monitor compliance with human rights, keeping the executive branch of government in check. For example, Honduras’s NHRI monitors the government’s use of emergency powers to contain extortion.

EMBs have also played a major role in ensuring credible elections. Mexico’s INE stood its ground in defending its autonomy in the midst of a contentious electoral reform process, including by challenging the proposal’s constitutionality before the Supreme Court (INE 2023).

Elections have also proved to be effective CIs in the region by allowing citizens to express their dissatisfaction with ruling parties through the so-called vote of punishment. In democratic elections held in the last few years, the vast majority (14 out of 15) resulted in an opposition victory (Sahd, Zovatto and Rojas 2023). The frequent use of runoff elections in the region, in which the reversal of first-round results is not uncommon (Zovatto 2022), further points to the ability of citizens to check power and reconsider their political options, demonstrated through their voting. However, the efficiency of elections as a CI is directly related to a country’s performance in Representation.

A ‘super-cycle’ of presidential elections in Latin America, with the potential to reconfigure the region’s political landscape, has been in development since 2021 and will end in 2024 (Zovatto 2023). In 2023, Paraguay’s presidential election stood out, as the ruling party maintained power, a shift from a recent trend in Latin America where both anti-system candidates and the appeal of political alternation had gained traction (Romero Ballivián 2023).

However, some fourth-branch institutions have not been as successful in maintaining public trust. In Guatemala, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (Tribunal Supremo Electoral, TSE), a body established with constitutional autonomy, has been criticized for applying unequal standards, to the detriment of the opposition, throughout the 2023 electoral process (WOLA 2023; DW 2023).

Civil society, social movements and the press

With regard to other informal CIs, in Barbados, CSOs were key to challenging discriminatory legislation that criminalized same-sex relations. Their activism resulted in a favourable High Court ruling that struck down such provisions (González Cabrera 2022). CSOs and other activists have spearheaded the push for reproductive rights throughout the continent (Belski 2022; ACLU 2023a). In Chile, the social movement that started in 2019 has been key to the constitutional process still under way (Montes 2022). In Mexico, demonstrations against the government’s proposals to change the electoral law through the ‘Plan B’ reform, signalled to political actors the public’s rejection of measures that could result in the weakening of the EMB. Further, journalism has helped to bring attention to questions of impartiality, prompting calls for an ethics code in the USA’s highest court (Kaplan, Elliott and Mierjeski 2023).

Conclusion

Formal domestic and supranational CIs have contributed to the maintenance of balance of power and relative stability in the Americas. Yet they have not acted alone in checking excesses of authority or demanding accountability. Cases where the success of formal CIs has only been partial or insufficient demonstrate the need to strengthen the region’s civic space through adequate legal and institutional frameworks.

The region has benefitted from the interplay between formal and fourth-branch institutions, and the future of democracy will depend partly on support for even more cross-institutional cooperation and dialogue.

In some countries of the Americas, geopolitical developments could affect compliance with the rule of law. Brazil’s renewed relations with Venezuela, despite the human rights and humanitarian crises in the latter, have been heavily criticized (Canineu and Ragozzino 2023), including by other countries in the region, such as Chile and Uruguay (BBC News Mundo 2023). International pressure is also key to ensuring that next year’s elections in Venezuela can be held in credible conditions. Russian aid in the form of military supplies to Nicaragua could further embolden the Central American country to keep up its stance of ignoring regional dialogue (Infobae 2023). In this sense, regional dialogue and diplomacy will be key to containing authoritarian gains.

Case Studies

References