Sectional elections in Ecuador: The return of Correaism and the rejection of an absent State
By Juan Francisco Camino*
The elections of local government authorities (mayors, councilors, council members, among others), of councilors of the Council of Citizen Participation and Social Control, and the referendum proposed by the Ecuadorian government, held on February 5, 2023, not only represent a heavy defeat for the administration of President Guillermo Lasso and for the center-right, to which he belongs. They have also given a very clear message to the entire political class of Ecuador about what citizens expect from the State.
Although the electoral result must be analyzed according to the particularities of each province and city of Ecuador, it is clear that the only winner of the day is the Movimiento Revolución Ciudadana (Citizen Revolution Movement), of former president Rafael Correa. At the local level, this political organization reached 10 out of 24 prefectures (provincial governments), 61 out of 240 mayoralties (municipal governments) and positioned itself against the referendum, being this option the winner in the 8 questions formulated by the government of President Guillermo Lasso.
In symbolic terms, “Correism” achieved a victory that it did not achieve even when it was in government: it obtained the prefectures of the 4 provinces with the largest population in the country (Pichincha, Azuay, Guayas and Manabí), returned to the municipality of Quito after 10 years and took control of the municipality of Guayaquil (the most important port of Ecuador) from the Social Christian Party, after 31 years of local government. Despite accusations of corruption, and sentences served in prison by some of Correa’s excoidearios, this political organization reached the second presidential round in 2021, is the first minority in the parliament and is the first political force at the local level. Let’s remember that the former president underwent the electoral campaign from Belgium and the judicial sentence against him suspended his political rights for 25 years. Nevertheless, he was a key figure for the success of his candidates.
The results also allow us to affirm that, on the side of the executive, one of the most important reasons for its defeat has been the absence of the State. In two years of government, the Ecuadorian state has shown itself incapable of providing basic public services to citizens, which has translated into problems of insecurity, lack of access to medicines, abuses in labor relations and educational infrastructure. Insecurity, for example, has left about 413 fatalities in prison massacres and 4,603 deaths as a result of violent deaths in 2022. For citizens, this is the most important problem, and it is evident that the State has been unable to provide solutions to this situation, being the executive branch the most affected, since it is responsible for identifying, designing, implementing, and evaluating public security policies.
The absence of the State has also been reflected in the very low budget execution. According to the Fundación Ciudadanía y Desarrollo, most of the ministries reached 30% of budget execution as of the first semester of 2022. This showed a weakening of public services, which in turn has had an impact on how citizens perceive the State. It seems that the national government, advised by libertarians in favor of a minimal State, did not understand that the Ecuadorian reality demands a present State, which provides public services for the poorest sectors, since an Ecuadorian with an average income (200 dollars per month) needs public health, education, and security, to at least survive every day.
The government’s deficient management, mainly in the social sector, was reflected in its low approval ratings, which varied between 20% and 30%. In this context, the government decided to implement an 8-question referendum, in which it prioritized the dissemination of a demagogic reduction of legislators and the possibility of extraditing Ecuadorians for transnational crimes such as drug trafficking, human trafficking, arms trafficking, money laundering, among others. As part of its strategy, the executive emphasized that extradition was necessary to expel criminals, presenting it as an alternative to the insecurity crisis, and that the reduction of approximately 17 seats would generate “great savings” for the State. Not even the very low approval of the Legislative Branch (close to 8%) helped the executive, and the “No” option won in all the questions of the consultation.
Although the electoral result must be analyzed according to the particularities of each province and city of Ecuador, it is clear that the only winner of the day is the Movimiento Revolución Ciudadana (Citizen Revolution Movement), of former president Rafael Correa.
The lesson that the election day leaves to President Lasso’s government has been clear: democracy works as a reward or punishment. If public services are provided to citizens, trust in institutions is produced and people can vote for the continuity of a government or for the reforms it proposes. However, if there is no management from the state organizations to provide the essentials to the citizens, the rejection vote will be the result. There is no greater science in this: David Easton already said it in the 1960s, the institutions of the political system must meet the demands of society to consolidate its legitimacy.
Hopefully, the president and his team will finally redirect the course of his administration, mainly in the social sector. This, just in case they want to avoid more popular rejection that could unleash a new wave of protests, or the consolidation of his political antithesis, Correism.
But this election also leaves some lessons for the rest of the political organizations. The null vote has been significant and is a symptom of the wear and tear of the political system. For example, in the province of Pichincha, this option reached 17.98% of the votes and surpassed the candidate who reached third place (15.76% of the valid votes). For the mayoralty of Quito, on the other hand, the null vote reached 13.76%, surpassing 8 mayoral candidates. For the mayoralty of Guayaquil, the null vote reached 10.68%, being the fourth option among the voters of this canton. The massive nullification of the vote should call the attention of all political organizations in the country, as it could later translate into an “Out with All”, something that Ecuador already experienced between 2005 and 2006, and which is currently present in Peru.
* Juan Francisco Camino University Professor (Quito). PhD student at the University of Salamanca (Spain). Master in International Relations by the Instituto de Altos Estudios Nacionales (Ecuador) and in Political Science by the Univ. of Salamanca.
Cover image: La Esperanza