By Fernando Martínez Escobar.
In these days of street demonstrations there is once again an impeachment process unfolding. The accusatory libels seem to be ready and there are already discussions about what they contain and whether this is reasonable or not. However, when it comes to a political trial in Paraguay, the content of the facts, the accusations, or the evidence does not matter as an element to determine the removal or not of the president. What matters is the number of votes in Congress and whether there is formally any or, rather, any accusation. The formal process is only to justify the deployment of the informal rule of the motion of no confidence to remove, in this case, the head of state.
There is no legislator who is unaware of these two rules; the formal one of the political trial of the presidential systems and the informal one of the vote of no confidence, similar to that of the parliamentary systems. In fact, that’s how it worked with Fernando Lugo, with Luís Ángel González Macchi (twice) and with Raúl Cubas Grau.
The accused may be guilty or innocent. All kinds of legal arguments can be generated and the lawyers will present innumerable evidence, accusations and defenses. But, all this does not affect the acquittal or the conviction of the accused. What really counts are the votes in Congress. The rest is a formal staging absolutely necessary for the informal rule to work.
So, in a presidential system, the fact that the Executive Power is accused must necessarily exist for the impeachment to proceed. However, this is not what happens in Paraguay.
Now, this does not mean that in Paraguay the system of government is parliamentary. For this, several things are required, among them, that there be a Head of State and a Head of Government in different heads.
But it is also necessary that the appointment of the Head of Government be made by Congress. The latter is what usually gives stability to parliamentary systems, since the Head of Government is only the one with the greatest parliamentary support.
This is why, in a parliamentary system, Congress can change the Head of Government if he loses the support of legislators, since the Head of Government is also a parliamentarian and his power comes directly from Congress.
Here is another difference from the presidential system. It is assumed that in presidentialism the acts of which the President is accused must exist and dismissals cannot be carried out by simple motion of censure, since both the members of parliament and the Executive Branch have legitimacy of direct origin in the popular vote. Therefore, a priori, neither the president can remove Congress, nor vice versa. Except through a political trial, in which due process must govern to judge the acts of which the President is accused.
Hence the need for the staging of accusatory libels, since any removal of the Head of the Executive Power in a presidential system implies the breaking of the original and direct link between the people and their representative. So this break must be justified to demonstrate its legitimacy. So, in a presidential system, the fact that the Executive Power is accused must necessarily exist for the impeachment to proceed. However, this is not what happens in Paraguay.
As we said, in our country, when it comes to impeachment, it is not about proving any fact. The system works as a hybrid on the formal rule of impeachment and the informal rule of the vote of no confidence.
So, although it is true that the events were denounced by the people in the streets and in turn formally reflected in two accusatory libels (one that accuses only the President and another that includes the Vice President), the main key to it will be held by the movement Honor Colorado of Horacio Cartes and, of course, the direction of his votes will not be based on accusatory libel, but on the political strategy of his movement with a view to party control, the 2023 elections, as well as negotiations with the PLRA and the rest of the parliamentary parties.
Cover image: Megacadena.com.py