X, In the article you posted I sense a great failing in Latin American "democracies." Freely elected officials who are not subject to rigorous oversight and the unquestioned authority of a strong judicial branch will likely be indistinguishable, in terms of corruption and abuse, from those empowered by other, less democratic, means. Even if democratically elected leaders are not corrupt, the absence of a powerful, impartial and trusted judiciary will leave those who feel alienated from power as volatile fodder for revolution and unrest.
I'd guess that many of us think of our system of government and equate that with "democracy." I believe "democratically elected officials," however, is only one factor in the rich mix of culture, tradition and separation of powers that constitute our system of governance. The ultimate protections, and the most maligned by many with economic and political power, are those protections conveyed by an independent judicial system.
It's always been a mystery to me that so many in this country who would be powerless to protect their rights without a strong judiciary, nevertheless get sucked right into the camp of those who viciously malign the courts. While it's not surprising that those who possess economic and political power will resent the judiciary's checks and balances on their ability to wield such power, why would the rest of us approve of the erosion of such important protections?
In spite of such considerations we see popular support for more and more limits on the power of the courts and more and more efforts on the part of big business, big government and law enforcement to mobilize such support by amassing, exaggerating and creating stories about judicial abuse.
Maybe, if they get their way, we'll one day have a better understanding of why the Latin Americans may not all feel that "democracy" is the lynchpin of opportinity for all nor a guarantee of freedom from oppression. |
