•Fernandez de Kirchner, Rousseff corruption scandals
By Emma Emeozor
OF all the regions of the world, Latin America has a robust record of female presidents. Between 1999 and 2015, female presidents were elected in Brazil, Costa Rica, Chile, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Argentina and Panama. It is a region where women have shown unprecedented interest in the political affairs of their respective countries, never afraid of the murky water they have to pass through.
However, it would seem that encouraging trend may not be sustained for too long going by developments in some of the countries of the region, particularly Argentina and Brazil. One vocabulary that runs foul in the ears of people is ‘corruption’ especially in the arena of governance. To accuse a politician of corruption is one of the easiest ways to pull dark clouds over his career. And this is the dilemma of two Latin American female ex-presidents: Argentina’s Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner and Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff.
Interestingly, the two women have one thing in common. And that is, they are leftists in a region where the political acrimony between the rightists and the leftists is worrisome. The two women are unrepentant allies of the late Venezuela President Hugo Chavez, Bolivia President and former President Fidel Castro of Cuba. The rightists group would do anything possible not only to uproot a leftist’s government but also to ensure the occupant of the top post is humiliated, never to return to power.
Now, there is worry that upcoming female politicians in the region may become wary of contesting top government posts, particularly the presidency. In a conservative society like that of Latin America, it is not enough for the court to acquit a politician of corruption charges. The accompanying moral judgments by the people have more damaging impact.
Argentina’s Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner
A lawyer and politician, Cristina became the country’s second female president but the first to be directly elected. She succeeded her husband Nestor Kirchner in 2007. She was Argentina’s president from 2007 to 2015. Before becoming president, she had served as Senator. On Thursday, she was a guest of the court where she had gone to answer charges of corruption. Her travail started in 2014, when her government was accused of strings of scandals. The Thursday appearance followed series of investigations carried out against her, beginning in 2014 when she was accused of defrauding the country out of $5.2 billion.
Precisely, she was accused, along with 14 others, of “selling the Central Bank’s US dollars below market value to inflate Argentine peso,” among others. She denied all the allegations, insisting she was a “victim of political persecution.”There is no love lost between her and her successor, Maurico Macri, whom she has blamed for her travails.
“Federal judge Claudio Bonadio said a scheme to inflate the Argentine peso by selling the central bank’s US dollars below market value would not have been possible without Fernandez’s approval.
Bonadio is investigating whether the move, enacted in the last few months of her second term, was a deliberate attempt to sabotage her successor,” according to Argentine Independent newspaper. “The judge said the state lost more than $5billion, allowing buyers to make big profits on the transactions.” Cristina faces five to 20 years in prison if found guilty.
According to reports, “The accusation is that the central bank took billions of dollars worth of money-losing positions in the futures market ahead of a widely expected devaluation of the Argentine peso. “The transactions referred to in the case involved $5 billion to $17 billion, according to court papers published by Argentina’s Judicial Information Center (CIJ).
“‘It’s impossible to believe that a financial operation of this size … could have been carried out without the approval of the highest executive level of the national government,” the ruling said.
Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff
Dilma Rousseff rode to power under the Workers Party which was accused of heavy involvement “in a multibillion-dollar graft scam at state-run oil company Petrobras.” Besides her party becoming unpopular due to the allegation which was said to have resulted in massive loss of jobs, Dilma was specifically accused of “breaking fiscal and budget laws.”
At the time, her opponents raised the alarm across the country that she “using state-controlled banks to finance popular social programs without revealing she was doing so.” She was also accused of shielding corrupt members of her party. She denied all the allegations. But the pendulum failed to swing in her favour.
More vexing was the allegation that her method was by issuing “six decrees Rousseff in 2015 that moved budget money around.” Reports had quoted her accusers as saying “she did this without congressional approval and that this, too, is an impeachable offense.” Despite her ‘strong ‘denial,
she was impeached and eventually sacked from office by the country’s Senate.
How do gender analysts react?
Since the exit of Cristina and Dilma and their consequent court trial, many questions have been raised on the fate of female politicians. The consensus among gender analysts is that there is a deliberate plan by male chauvinists to dwarf female politicians by bringing them to public odium.
“If we women throw our weight about in a realm that has been exclusive to men, it’s logical that these things will happen,” said Norma Amorín, 73, an American retired beautician told The New York Time, while reacting to the fate of the two women. .
The newspaper quoted analysts as saying gender is not the cause of the leaders’ current problems. “But, they add, the collective decline of the two women points to persistence of macho attitudes in the region, especially within the political establishment.
“There are powerful forces at play that resist these changes,” said Sergio Berensztein, a prominent Argentine political commentator, referring to how women had gained and were now losing ground in Latin America’s corridors of power.”
As it is, Latin America may have begun to lose steam it gathered as a leading region where women are given equal opportunities like their men counterparts to vie for any political office. Even, in Chile, the female president, Michelle Bachelet’s popularity has plummet following series accusations of non performance and still, corruption.
So, it is like the wind of harmattan blowing across the region. Even as the men are being accused of deliberate plan to relegate the women to the bottom of the rung of political ladder, there remains the question of probity in government. The question is: Should probity be sacrificed for the interest of non performing female leader in the corridor of power?
Berensztein’s reaction is tacit enough: He told The New York Times that the plight of the three leaders Dilma, Cristina and Bachelet) “should also be considered in the broader context of the crises being endured by incumbent presidents, both men and women, across the region.
“Corruption scandals and a failure to take full advantage of the revenues from commodities like oil, copper and soybeans have led to increased dissatisfaction with those in power.”
For a long time to come, the downfalls of Cristina and Dilma will remain the talk in cities across Latin America and beyond. Even, political commentators believe their experience will challenge other prospective female candidates contesting top posts to be more prudent, especially in handling financial matters.
Already, they have pointed to the rise of other female politicians in the region. “María Eugenia Vidal was elected last year as the governor of Buenos Aires, Argentina’s largest and most populated province. For a while, Marina Silva upended the 2014 presidential race in Brazil. Ms. Vidal’s victory, in particular, was viewed positively here because she did not merely succeed a popular male colleague or spouse.”