POLITICS: Is OAS Mission to Peru a Waste of Time?

By Paul Weinberg Reprint | | Print |

Paul Weinberg

WINDSOR, Jun 9 2000 (IPS) - Can Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy calm the troubled waters of Peruvian politics after other efforts have failed?

Axworthy, accompanied by the secretary general of the Organisation of American States, Cesar Gaviria, are headed soon to that South American country to press President Alberto Fujimori to undertake electoral and human rights reforms.

They are expected to visit before Fujimori’s planned inauguration as president for the third time, scheduled for Jul. 28.

Peruvian human rights groups have stressed the importance of the mission going to their country in the next two or three weeks, and not wait until after Fujimori is formally sworn in again.

The decision was made to undertake the mission after two days of intense bargaining by 34 foreign ministers at the General Assembly of the OAS, held on Jun. 4-6 in the Canadian city of Windsor.

The OAS’s own election observation mission to Peru had cited reports of persistent irregularities in the electoral process.

Axworthy’s mandate is essentially to explore “options and recommendations aimed at strengthening democracy,” including measures to reform the electoral process, judicial and constitutional tribunals, and the removing of curbs to press freedom.

During the OAS debate, representatives of both Venezuela and Mexico expressed concerns about any intrusion into the national sovereignty of member states of the OAS. Peruvian Foreign Minister Fernando de Trazegnies also questioned whether the OAS had the right to interfere in his country’s internal affairs.

Canada played an active part in the wording of the OAS resolution, along with the United States, which had called for stronger action against Fujimori, and against Peru.

Part of the price for Fujimori’s approval for the OAS mission to come to Peru is that the results of the controversial election run off on May 28 be permitted to stand. Fujimori’s sole opponent, Alejandro Toledo had withdrawn from the race, stating that fraud had been planned and the government-influenced media had refused to cover his campaign.

Earlier, President Fujimori had engineered the removal from the bench of three judges, appointees of his, who had declared his candidature for a third term as unconstitutional.

Axworthy’s mission is being viewed by some Peruvian as the country’s last chance. “All our hopes for re-establishing democracy and bringing an end to the huge crisis we are experiencing in Peru as a result of fraudulent elections now rest on the shoulders of Canada’s Lloyd Axworthy,” says Sofia Macher, director of the Peruvian Co-ordination of Human Rights Organisations.

Macher says that 80 percent of Peruvians believe that the recent polls were fraudulent. “We need a new electoral system to ensure these elections will be free and fair, along with the freedom of the press and the restoration of democratic institutions which have been systematically undermined by President Fujimori,” she added.

Macher adds that tens of thousands of people continue to protest in the streets, engage in work stoppages and general strikes, but that the government’s only response has been “police brutality and repression.”

Bill Fairbairn, South America Co-ordinator of the Canadian based Inter-Church Committee on Human Rights in Latin America told IPS after the General Assembly meeting that the mandate for Axworthy’s mission is “weak.”

He recalled the OAS mission to Peru in 1992 after Fujimori dissolved his country’s Congress and assumed dictatorial powers in a coup. The mission ended up being ignored by the Peruvian president, Fairbairn said.

Fairbairn says it is unfortunate that countries like Argentina and Chile, which experienced dictatorships, and military repression did not come out for strong measures against the electoral fraud and repression in Peru.