60 Final Country Report (Final Version)
lopez630
Censorship and Persecution of Anti-Corruption Figures and Indigenous Peoples:
An Analysis of Guatemala’s Fight on Corruption and How Open Data Relates as a Solution
Guaranteed in Article 35 of the Guatemalan constitution, the right to freedom of expression is technically given to the Guatemalan peoples. However, the censorship and persecution of reputable anti-corruption political, governmental, and media figures, as well as the indigenous population, has proved to be a prominent modern issue with roots dating back to the beginning of the Guatemalan Civil War. This censorship and persecution is led by government figures and powerful businessmen that has resulted in a struggle of political progress versus intimidation tactics and/or harming actions, as those who are corrupt tend to want to keep their self-satisfying positions and will go to the lengths needed to defend such. Thus, a culture of taking self-preserving precautionary measures has risen within anti-corrupt figures, whether that is through self-censorship or retracting from the public or country itself. Yet, despite these, the fight persists. Through movements continued through leading progressive figures and the public, global organizational programs and initiatives, as well as the potential for a stronger open data environment, advancement in addressing the corruption of Guatemalan leaders continues.
The “war” on corruption has been evident since the beginning of the actual Guatemalan Civil War that spanned from 1960 to 1996. This war was between the dictator-led governments during the time, a result of a US-backed military coup established in 1954, and a plethora of leftist rebel groups. The dictatorship leaders during those 36 years, like with most societal aspects, implemented methods to control. With regards to media, it was done through use of laws used to censor opposition and acts of violence or defamation in order to silence or stop any credibility of media figures. Specifically regarding just the media outlet of journalism, “three hundred and twenty four journalists were killed, while a hundred and twenty-six are still missing” (Vela, 2016) during the civil war. After a United Nations Peace Accord and democratic elections at the fall of the authoritative government, post-war conditions for the media have slightly improved in terms of the freedom of the press. Yet the relationship between those corrupt figures in power and censorship of specific opposition still exists. “Censorship in the form of intimidation is still prevalent in Guatemala, where there have been 24 murdered journalists between 2000 and 2013, all unsolved” (Vela, 2016). In March of 2021, three journalists were murdered after one become reputable for investigating a political money laundering scandal that resulted in protests. In November of that same year, although not being murder numbers specifically, the Centro de Reportes Informativos sobre Guatemala (CERIGUA or the Center of Information Reports of Guatemala) researched and reported 117 cases of violence and/or harassment of journalists stating “that police and political parties were among the primary aggressors” (FreedomHouse, 2016). In terms of recency, “throughout 2021, the Guatemalan Association of Journalists recorded 135 attacks and threats against journalists” with “at least one journalist” being killed (FreedomHouse, 2016). As is evident from this, the effects of a historical media censorship are still prevalent today as persecution carries on.
As stated in the introduction, some anti-corrupt figures look for refuge in the escape of the public eye or the country of Guatemala itself in order to protect themselves from the still very real dangers to their well-being and life. A recent example of this is the situation of Jude Erika Aifán, which is explained in the March 2022 article Anti-Corruption Guatemalan Judge Resigns and Flees to the US by Association Press News. Aifán has been a prominent leader within the condemning cases of multiple powerful people that hold influencing positions within the economy and the government, up until her decision to resign and flee her home country. She says “they left me no other option,” referring to pressure and harassment from those within her sector and the Attorney General Consuelo Porras that has been a result of her past anti-corruption prosecutions and accusations. This is supplemented by retaliation of those affected, particularly by defamation of her integrity within her occupation, where she currently is facing at least 20 legal complaints about the overstepping of professional scope and boundaries. One of these cases and affiliations is actually her recent investigation into the current President’s 2019 presidential campaign and its possible connection to illegal funding. However, it can be assumed that she will continue her work in her temporary home in Washington D.C., as her influence has already made progressive impacts that can be seen in the recent happenings for the Attorney General, the same position that she has had a strained relationship with through Consuelo Porras.
In summary, the work of Aifán and others like her have struck fear into others within corruption, specifically those who were looking to succeed Consuelo Porras for the Attorney General position. This is covered in Prensa Libre’s Analysts Explain Why There are Few Candidates for Attorney General, written by Douglas Cuevas in February 2022. For context, this position in Guatemala is elected rather than appointed. A mere three days before the application due date, only had seven applicants. This procrastination was done by the unsubmitted candidates intentionally because they are trying to present their application last. It is a strategy in order to avoid the public’s radar, a public that has strived to become empowered despite history and has the capability to scrutinize and criticize applicants more with added time knowing who they are. The Center for National Economic Research’s analyst Francisco Quezada calls this a “dirty game of politics,” as the public wants to partake in “not exhibiting the best of a candidate but the worst” in order to protect themselves from corruption. Another similar reason for this deliberate procrastination that is brought up by Alvaro Montenegro, part of the Alliance for Reform movement, is that the recent crackdown against corrupt lawyers and other judges led by folk like Aifán have kept others from putting themselves into the mix of consideration in order to avoid possible problematic situations being uncovered regarding their own integrity. So, despite governmental pushback through threats and harassment, even forcing anti-corrupt figures to take defensive measures, there has been some progress that is proved through hesitancy of exposure.
The Civil War not only had a role in the persecution of the media that has lasted until today, but it had a role of the persecution of Guatemala’s indigenous peoples as well. In fact, the role is commonly described as a successful Maya genocide, where the government forces implemented what many call the Silent Holocaust in the predominantly indigenous North through “the murder of thousands by a military government that maintains its authority by terror” (America’s Watch, 1984, pp. 2-3). This consisted of massacres and disappearances alongside the destruction of villages, because the government saw the Mayas as supporters of the insurgency while they lived in the same areas where the guerillas and opposition collaborators operated. Like with the general media, indigenous-specific media has been predisposed to ripples of this maltreatment since. However, the fight continues against these detrimental historical roots as time advances, as outlined in La Prensa Comunitaria’s article Indigenous Community Operators Win Court Case Against the Guatemalan State. It covers the recent 2021 court case between the State of Guatemala and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR), where the State was found guilty of several violations of law against several Maya peoples for their prevention of Indigenous-resource community radio stations. These violations of freedom of speech, equality before the law, and participation in cultural life were specifically barred due to the State’s actions of raids and discriminatory state radio licensure. As a result of this case, reparations, reversal measures, and future protection/development initiatives were ordered for the affected peoples by the independent judicial body of the Organization of American States. It is a “turning point for community radio stations in Guatemala” (Ixchel Estéro), as the support of non-Guatemalan resources and organizations strive to help provide information services, education, entertainment, and defense against the State that has historically put indigenous populations at the bottom of social hierarchy since the civil war.
To combat corruption-led persecution, having open data as a public good for society and the media can be critical – as long as the information is accessible, used, and applied in a progressive manner. Data and information “is considered open when it’s shareable, comparable, reusable, timely, accessible, and understandable” (Transparency International, 2016). Its prevalence can create value for a society, seen in a multitude of ways including cost reductions, process improvements, and more applicable to Guatemala, providing more government transparency and also the opportunity for checks-and-balances done by those in society who are looking for accountability and action. Yet, “only nine per cent of all key government data sets, including government budgets, procurement tenders, legislation, company registers, land ownership, and government spending are in the open” (Open Data Index, 2016). For Guatemala’s open data environment specifically, the country is scored at 26/100 as of 2019 by the Open Data Barometer and placed at a rank of 63 when compared to 114 total countries. This score is an aggregate average after taking open data readiness, implementation, and impact into consideration, where it scored 36, 37, and 5 respectively. It has therefore been given the title as a “straggler” country, where minimal governmental progress has been seen in the past five years and is struggling to overcome a serious weakness in the analyzed open data environment.
Although open data can be seen as a generalized tool, there are some specificities that can be used for the case of Guatemala and its corruption. In terms of what streamlined data sets would be most impactful at the moment, this can be broken five sectors: political parties, parliaments and legislatures, businesses and the private sector, the judiciary, and public officials. For political parties, more information regarding budgets and activity would be a starting point to work on obtaining. For parliaments and legislatures, reports on lobbying activities and administrative data needs to be more open. For the businesses and private sector, there are important bookkeeping data holdings that could be improved upon with more availability and clarification: company structures, the company’s own name and identification coding, the company directors and significant shareholders, and the company’s statutory filings. As for the judiciary, contact methods, case schedules and overviews, and court decisions and their processes should be supplied at a minimum. Finally, for the public officials, their declarations of pursuits and assets, their lobbying, and their procurement processes should be made open at a minimal level. These types of data sets for their respective sectors would help address “bribery, corrupt insider fraud, undeclared conflict of interests and improper use of public funds and lobbying abuses” (Transparency International, 2016). Although these sets may seem specific and singular at first, they indeed do have intersectionality between each other; an advantage is that these different data can be combined and compared, as well as verified through cross-checking. This in turn provides a more holistic and informed perspective, where stakeholders in a society can make better decisions about their investment of resources and help them detect problematic people and/or situations.
As discussed, the media and society in general face persecution in Guatemala that has been evident throughout its history. This internal war has been detrimental to the media, indigenous folk, and the entire society in the grand scheme of things. However, even though there are withstanding dangers for those looking to continue the progressive fight, progress is obtainable. There has to be more of a development of culture that condemns corruption and honors integrity, more assistance and aid from outside parties around the globe, and a commitment to free open data quality, facilitation, publication, alignment, and accessibility. Though this report underlines the successes and possibilities, implementation is another ordeal in itself.
References
AP News (2022). “Anti-corruption Guatemalan judge resigns and flees to the US”. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/caribbean-central-america-guatemala-guatemala-city-alejandro-giammattei-9fb70801e9f3390e148083f1a862da01
FreedomHouseDC (2016). “Guatemala”. Freedom House. https://freedomhouse.org/country/guatemala/freedom-world/2022
Global Open Data Index (2016). “The GODI 2016/17 Report: The State of Open Government Data in 2017”. Open Knowledge International. https://index.okfn.org/insights/
Meyer, Marshall T. (1984). America’s Watch. Publisher Unknown.
Open Data Barometer (2017). “Global Report, Fourth Edition”. World Wide Web Foundation. https://opendatabarometer.org/doc/4thEdition/ODB-4thEdition-GlobalReport.pdf
Prensa Comunitaria (2021). “Indigenous community radio operators win court case against the Guatemalan State”. Global Voices. https://globalvoices.org/2021/12/28/indigenous-community-radio-operators-win-court-case-against-the-guatemalan-state/
Prensa Libre Hemeroteca PL (2022). “Analistas explican por qué hay pocos candidatos para Fiscal General y qué se espera esta semana en la Comisión de Postulación”.
Transparency International (2016). “Open Data for Growth and Anti-Corruption”. Transparency International.https://www.transparency.org/files/content/pages/2016_January_G20_position_Paper_Open_Data.pdf
Vela, Shahrazad M. E. (2016). La Lucha Por Un Espacio: Guatemalan Journalists Fighting Against Censorship and Violence. Ann Arbor: University of Arizona. https://repository.arizona.edu/bitstream/handle/10150/613568/azu_etd_14741_sip1_m.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y