9/24/2007

Too late now...

In May, the PAC offered the government a gutsy deal: If the CAFTA is approved in the referendum, the PAC will not obstruct the passage of the so-called Agenda de Implementación, but if the CAFTA is rejected, the ruling party and its allies have to stop pushing the agenda for their part. The controversial Agenda encompasses 13 laws that need to be modified or passed in order to allow the provisions of the CAFTA to take effect without violating the laws of the country. Among these 13 provisions are the breaking of the monopolies of the public, or state-owned, institutions such as the Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad (ICE, provides electricity and telecommunications services) and the Instituto Nacional de Seguros (INS, insurance and health care for work-related injuries). The agenda also includes changes in the areas of intellectual property rights and patents. There has been a lot of controversy and confusion over how to make the TLC congruent with the law here. For example, should lawmakers pass the implementation agenda before they can vote on the CAFTA, or after? Does the opposition have the right to obstruct the passage of such legislation if the CAFTA has been approved? It is important to point out that the implementation agenda deals with the most controversial aspects of the CAFTA. Issues of trade, quotas and market access are not causing the polarization the country is suffering at the moment; it is precisely those changes to the legal structure that have caused the current crisis. So the deal the PAC offered was the equivalent of putting all your eggs in one basket – all or nothing.
The government and the ruling party never officially responded. And this may have been a grave mistake, given that the PAC and its allies in congress have been torpedoing any attempt by the PLN to begin passing the Agenda and has been refusing to outrule the possibility that they will continue to do that in case of a YES win. The window of time for Costa Rica to ratify the CAFTA and pass the necessary legislation closes in March 2008, however, and it looks like the government is getting nervous. This could have something to do with the memorandum scandal. The embarrassing reference to the extortionary practices of the Movimiento Libertario in return for their support for CAFTA and implementation agenda, caused the ML to move away from the PLN and demonstrate its independence. It looks like now the ruling party really doesn’t have the necessary number of votes it needs for the qualified majority anymore.
So on Thursday, the minister of the presidency, Rodrigo Arias, announced that the government will refrain from trying to pass the 13 laws in case of a NO victory, arguing that there was still time to reach an agreement with the PAC before the referendum. He also stated that the PLN has always “agreed to apply the results of the referendum on the TLC to its projects, but the PAC asked for additional compromises that seemed to lead to a trap.” (La Nación, 20.Sept) A few hours later, President Arias affirmed the announcement: “He who wins, wins everything, and he who loses, loses everything.” Unfortunately, Mayi Antillón, head of the PLN faction in congress seemed not to have gotten the memo, since she gave a short interview to La Nación stating that there are no changes to the PLN strategy, that in case of a NO win, the 13 laws would be sent back into commission to study them under the light what the people said. She obviously wanted to prevent the impression that the PLN was caving in to opposition pressure, but may have served to make the PLN look more confused.
And the PAC? They responded by saying that this proposal had its moment, but that this moment has passed. In fact, it looks like Ottón Solís seems to have gone on the offensive. On Monday both, La Nación and Extra, published an interview with him in which he not only argued that now the TLC and the agenda a separate issues – because the government wanted it so- but he also calls Rodrigo Arias (brother of the president and minister of the presidency) and the presidential spokesperson Michelle Mitchell liars, argues that the president himself cannot defend the TLC and hence refuses to debate him, and argues that Casas and Sánchez, the authors of the famous memo, have not been removed from their position because the government fears that they would come out publicly saying that they had only done what they were asked to do. There are rumors that the memo was actually written in response to a presidential request for help in the CAFTA campaign. He also criticizes the TSE for not having enforced tighter control of CAFTA campaign financial contributions by the private sector. The TSE decided at the beginning of he campaign that individual contributions cannot exceed 4.200.000 colones ($8100). Whether Solís' accusation are true or not, they represent very strong words for the traditionally more subdued leader of the PAC.

No comments: