“What is a hybrid regime?”, by Farid Kahhat

Since 2006, the Intelligence Unit of the magazine “The Economist” publishes annually its Index of Democracy. It classifies the political regimes of 167 countries into four categories: full democracy, deficient democracy, hybrid regime and authoritarian regime.

LOOK: Extreme rains, droughts and lack of access: this is the water crisis that is hitting the world (and how it affects Peru)

Since 2006, the Peruvian political regime had always been classified as a deficient democracy, until in 2022 it was classified, for the first time, as a hybrid regime (that is, halfway between democracy and authoritarianism). This gave rise to a debate about the causes of our degradation. For example, Juan Carlos Tafur pointed out that, “when the report that gives this rating is read correctly, one realizes that this is the main responsibility for the damage committed by Pedro Castillo […]before the current government”.

Proof that the report has not been read correctly or incorrectly is that Peru is the only country in Latin America and the Caribbean for which it offers an explanatory box, which is not usually cited. In that box, the causes of our classification are listed: the Castillo coup is mentioned, but also the 20 deaths during the protests in the days after it (as well as the declaration of a state of emergency), as a preamble to the conclusion: “Due to these events, Peru’s overall score in 2022 declined and the country is now classified as a hybrid regime.”

He then indicates that the drop in our score “also reflects the growing political instability that led the country to be governed by six presidents and three Congresses since 2016.” And add both the deterioration of state capacity during the Castillo government and the variable in which we obtain the worst score (3.13 out of 10): our political culture (which would combine “extreme polarization” and “high tolerance” towards an eventual military government). Despite his generous contribution to making them worse, Peru’s problems did not start with Pedro Castillo.

Pedro Castillo is being investigated for a criminal organization. (Photo: Diffusion)

I would venture to say that if things continue as they have in recent months, our rating next year could continue to drop. For example, the only variable in which Peru obtained a high score in 2022 (8.75 out of 10) is “electoral process and pluralism”. One more proof that no international actor believed in the existence of fraud in the 2021 elections: neither the electoral observation missions nor the governments of Canada, the United States, the European Union and the United Kingdom nor the Intelligence Unit of the magazine “The Economist” (a liberal medium aimed essentially at a public in the business world).

I would say the same regarding the variable “civil liberties”. One of the questions that is formulated to try to quantify this variable is the following: “There is freedom of expression and protest (with the generally accepted exceptions, such as prohibiting incitement to violence).” The crime of “advocacy for terrorism” could fall into that category, but there are also indications of its discretionary use to restrict civil rights. In the past, there are examples such as those of the play “La Cautiva” or that of the tables of Sarhua. Today the Ministry of the Interior creates an open line for anonymous denunciations for apology of terrorism, in a context in which the Directorate against Terrorism of the Police (Dircote) literally sees terrorists everywhere. We mentioned earlier a former Dircote chief who blamed the MRTA (a terrorist organization that ceased to exist in the 20th century) for being involved in the protests. His successor in office maintains that “Sendero Luminoso is present throughout the country,” but when they went to look for him in San Marcos, they could not file terrorism charges against any of the 193 detainees.

Source: Elcomercio