Andean Group - April 2011 (ISSN 1741-4466)

President Rafael Correa says he will leave office if the public fails to approve a referendum called by his government for 7 May. This is a tried and tested formula. Correa threatened to do the same if the public failed to endorse a new constitution in a referendum in September 2008. By turning 7 May into a plebiscite on his own rule, Correa is effectively asking the public to accept his judgement and not to bother debating the importance of the 10 questions in the referendum, which range from judicial reform and penal reform to restrictions on press ownership and banning bullfighting.

Campaigning for the referendum got underway on 26 March: 24 organisations are supporting the 'yes' vote, 17 the 'no' vote and 12 are ostensibly independent. No private publicity is permitted and each organisation has been assigned US$100,000 by the electoral authorities to run its campaign. In a speech at a rally in Quito to launch the government's campaign, Correa made it clear that to vote “no" would not only be a rejection of him but also an unpatriotic act: the government's main slogan is “Say 'yes' to Ecuador".

Lumping all dissenters into the bracket of apátridas does not just lower the tone of debate it also implies that there should be no debate. Some important issues are at stake in the referendum. A voter could quite legitimately support Correa but disagree with some of his proposals. After all, a significant number of those groups that are opposing the referendum once formed an integral part of Correa's “citizens' revolution"; they just feel that it has strayed off course and is now becoming a cult of personality. The main focus of attack for the opposition is the proposed judicial reform, which would to all intents and purposes award Correa 18 months to reshape the judiciary as he sees fit. The opposition argues that Correa is intent on concentrating excessive power in his own hands. Correa argues his sole motivation is to stamp out judicial corruption.

Correa has been especially critical of the “corrupt press" (he is suing El Universo for an opinion piece) and the “conservative and reactionary wing" of the Roman Catholic Church, which he claims are “enemies" of his “citizens' revolution". After the Ecuadorean bishops' conference released a communiqué calling for a guarantee that the referendum would not violate “the independence of the branches of government" and the “freedom of expression and information", he said, “it would be horrific if the Church casts an opinion on the referendum and gets involved so blatantly in politics." He added: “It has nothing to do with faith or religion: they were very badly informed about the Montecristi constitution, saying that it was legalising abortion and same sex marriage when it did nothing of the sort. I hope they are not making another mistake" (see sidebar).

• Church

Various members of the bishops' conference tried to clarify that the Church had no intention of intervening in the referendum campaign and would not be backing either the “yes" or the “no" vote from the pulpit, but they reiterated the main point in their statement that institutional independence should not be violated. This is at best confusing as it clearly implies that they feel it is being violated, or has the potential to be, otherwise why would they feel the compulsion to speak out?