Power Consolidation in Venezuela and Peru: Different Technique with Different Outcomes

March 26, 2017
· by · in

The techniques that Hugo Chavez and Alberto Fujimori took in their consolidation of power were quite different.

 

Chavez had the Legislative branch work for him and slowly changed the constitution to consolidate his power and make it harder for the opposition to effectively challenge him. One of the most notable was the process for a recall. One had to gather signatures from 1/5 of the registered voters in the state just for a vote to happen and if than was successful the opposition would have gather no specifically outlined number of votes, but simply more than the incumbent received in the previous election.

 

Fujimori, on the other hand, utilized the autogolpe. Which was much more abrupt, but, admittedly, a little easier given the circumstances. While Chavez left at least the appearance of some other branches of checks and balances, Fujimori abolished all horizontal accountability.

 

These decisions, it would appear, had an impact on the longevity of their administrations’ longevity. While Fujimori fled after 10 years and what many considered an impending, inevitable end to his reign. Chavez died in power after 14 years.

 

These differences in approaches could possibly be explained by the two men’s previous experience. Chavez being a politician and one who tried to lead a coup earlier in his life had experience in the system. Fujimori was a complete outsider, Levitsky and Cameron tell us. This meant that he had little to no experience, no administrative team, and no real plan when he came to the office. I think this contributed to his abrupt style and people noticed.

 

Their elections themselves also showed differences. Chavez was able to maintain power without touching the actual election process. After calls that his election was fraudulent, several NGOs confirmed its legitimacy. Again, Fujimori took a different route. During his contentious (read: illegal?) third bid for president accusations of election fraud were all but confirmed.

 

These differences in techniques had real effects on the longevity of these two gentlemen’s reign.