Why is it essential to support the implementation of compulsory voting in Paraguay?

Escuchar la entrada

By Héc­tor Far­iña*

Is it im­por­tant to sup­port com­pul­sory vot­ing? First, the an­swer is sim­ple and force­ful: yes, it is. For sev­eral rea­sons. Com­pul­sory vot­ing is men­tioned in Ar­ti­cle 118 of our Con­sti­tu­tion, which es­tab­lishes suf­frage as a right, duty, and pub­lic func­tion of the voter. Sec­ond, the Elec­toral Code also es­tab­lishes the oblig­a­tory na­ture of the vote, a fine for non-com­pli­ance and it in­di­cates who are the cit­i­zens who are ex­empted from the oblig­a­tion to vote. In a coun­try that seeks to be se­ri­ous and wants to move for­ward, the min­i­mum that is re­quired is the re­spect for the Con­sti­tu­tion and the laws. No other ar­gu­ments would be nec­es­sary.

How­ever, it is also nec­es­sary to raise po­lit­i­cal mo­tives (un­der­stand­ing pol­i­tics as the search for the com­mon good). The marked ab­sen­teeism in our coun­try is the re­sult of dis­con­tent with politi­cians in gen­eral, in­dig­na­tion against cor­rup­tion and im­punity. But ab­sen­teeism, be­yond be­ing a le­git­i­mate form of protest, leads to noth­ing. On the con­trary, it wors­ens the sit­u­a­tion, since those who do not turn out to vote be­come ac­com­plices of the sta­tus quo.

The ab­sen­teeism com­plicit in the cur­rent sit­u­a­tion is part of a vi­cious cir­cle. Cor­rup­tion gen­er­ates cit­i­zen ap­a­thy and this in turn be­comes elec­toral ab­sen­teeism, which en­cour­ages politi­cians to mo­ti­vate vot­ers with money or other fa­vors, and this money has its ori­gin in cor­rup­tion. We must re­al­ize that the cit­i­zen who is an­gry with the cor­rup­tion of the coun­try and de­cides to ab­sent him­self from the elec­tions, ends up be­ing an ac­com­plice of the cor­rupt.

Thanks to ab­sen­teeism, what rules and de­fines the elec­tions is the eco­nomic ca­pac­ity of the can­di­dates. If an elec­tion is de­fined by money and not by mass par­tic­i­pa­tion, then we could not even say that we are in a democ­racy, but in a plu­toc­racy, that is, the gov­ern­ment of money. It is ur­gent to im­prove the qual­ity of our frag­ile democ­racy.

Re­gard­ing the qual­ity of our democ­racy, it is alarm­ing and hor­ri­fy­ing to note who are the cit­i­zens ab­sent from the elec­tions. Ac­cord­ing to of­fi­cial data from the Su­pe­rior Court of Elec­toral Jus­tice (TSJE), 4,260,816 vot­ers were el­i­gi­ble to vote in the 2018 pres­i­den­tial elec­tions, of which 1,665,351 cit­i­zens were ab­sent, rep­re­sent­ing 39.08% of the elec­torate. Ac­cord­ing to of­fi­cial data, 900,000 of the ab­sen­tees were young peo­ple be­tween 18 and 29 years of age.

It is re­ally a cat­a­stro­phe for our democ­racy that young peo­ple born in democ­racy are not in­ter­ested in democ­racy. Ac­cord­ing to data from the TSJE, for the April 2023 elec­tions, young peo­ple aged be­tween 18 and 29 who are el­i­gi­ble to vote are 1,595,314, rep­re­sent­ing one third of the na­tional elec­toral roll. Young peo­ple could de­fine the next elec­tions, but it is im­por­tant to re­mem­ber, they do not vote.

There is an­other el­e­ment to be noted. Mas­sive ab­sen­teeism, as it hap­pened in the in­ter­nal elec­tions of the Na­tional Con­cer­ta­tion, gen­er­ates op­por­tu­ni­ties for elec­toral fraud. Siesta time, when not even flies were fly­ing, was the op­por­tu­nity to load votes, as was no­ticed in places such as the Na­tivi­dad de María School in the Cap­i­tal.

In short, ab­sen­teeism is tragic for democ­racy. There­fore, elec­toral par­tic­i­pa­tion is a way to fight the cor­rup­tion of politi­cians and raise the qual­ity of democ­racy.

What is the ex­pe­ri­ence of the coun­tries in the re­gion? In South Amer­ica, ex­cept for Colom­bia, where suf­frage is free, and Venezuela, whose data are not re­li­able, the rest of the coun­tries have com­pul­sory vot­ing and ap­ply it. We have it and do not ap­ply it. This leaves us, as in al­most all rank­ings, in the worst places.

Let’s look at the lev­els of par­tic­i­pa­tion in re­cent elec­tions:

1	Uruguay 2019 Presidential	90,13%
2	Bolivia 2020 Presidential	88.42%
3	Chile 2022 Referendum	85.86%
4	Ecuador 2022 Presidential	82.62%
5	Brazil 2022 Presidential	79.05%
6	Peru 2022 Municipal	77.30%
7	Argentina 2021 Legislative	71.72%
8	Paraguay 2021 Municipal	60,55%

 

The dif­fer­ence is re­mark­able. Among these cases, it is im­por­tant to high­light the Chilean ex­pe­ri­ence. They had com­pul­sory vot­ing and aban­doned it for vol­un­tary vot­ing. In the Chilean pres­i­den­tial elec­tions of 2021, the turnout in the first round was 47.33% and in the sec­ond round 55.64%. For the Con­sti­tu­tional Ref­er­en­dum of 2022, manda­tory suf­frage was cho­sen, bring­ing the turnout to no less than 85.86%. Based on this ex­pe­ri­ence, the Chilean Sen­ate again made vot­ing com­pul­sory for all elec­tions.

Nei­ther if Bad Bunny is the can­di­date, nor if politi­cians, priests, ed­u­ca­tors, so­cial com­mu­ni­ca­tors, or in­flu­encers en­cour­age par­tic­i­pa­tion, the cur­rent level can­not be im­proved. The only truly ef­fec­tive way is law en­force­ment.

absenteeism is tragic for democracy. Therefore, electoral participation is a way to fight the corruption of politicians and raise the quality of democracy.

Does the TSJE need a law to en­force com­pul­sory vot­ing? No. The TSJE al­ready has all the le­gal tools to en­force com­pul­sory vot­ing. Law 635/​95, which reg­u­lates elec­toral jus­tice, gives the TSJE the duty and power to reg­u­late com­pul­sory vot­ing by res­o­lu­tion. The or­der of pri­or­ity of the laws pro­tects the TSJE to com­ply with the law. In ad­di­tion, Law 6858/​2021 gave the TSJE the power to col­lect the elec­toral fines pro­vided for in the elec­toral code.

The Su­pe­rior Tri­bunal of Elec­toral Jus­tice, the supreme body in elec­toral mat­ters, has in its hands to im­prove the de­mo­c­ra­tic qual­ity of our coun­try. It only lacks the po­lit­i­cal will.

* Héc­tor Far­iña is a Sale­sian Priest, Pas­tor, and Rec­tor of the María Aux­il­i­adora Shrine. He has a bach­e­lor’s de­gree in The­ol­ogy and is a teacher of So­cial Sci­ences.

Cover im­age: Tri­bunal Su­pe­rior de Jus­ti­cia Elec­toral