Presidential Power in Peru = Squash the Opposition?

Recently, ex-president Alejandro Toledo (of the Perú Posible party) has accused President Alan García (of APRA) of using his executive powers to “harass” members of the opposition, specifically those who are considering running in the 2011 presidential election.

Toledo has recently returned to Peru to work on strengthening his Perú Posible party. In the last elections, the party only won 2 seats (with 4.10% of the total votes) in the 120-seat unicameral Congress. When last in Lima, Toledo was implicated in a case of governmental mismanagement, specifically in regards to improper use of the presidential plane. Humala Tasso, who was a presidential candidate in 2006 with the Unión por el Perú, is also being charged with corruption (the DA has requested that he be sentenced to 15 years in prison). Both men claim to be victims of presidential harassment.

Peru does have a relatively strong executive. Under the most recent constitution, the President appoints the Prime Minister and also the Council of Ministers (the cabinet). Bills can be proposed by either the executive or the legislature, but the president does have reactive (veto) powers. The president also has proactive (decree) powers, but all presidential bill proposals or decrees must first be approved by the Council of Ministers. (But because the Council is nominally appointed by the president, this does not appear to be a huge block to presidential power.)

According to Toledo’s claims, it could be interpreted that García is attempting to further solidify his personal power as president in anticipation of the upcoming presidential elections. In 2006, García received 30.62% of the votes in the first-round election in April, and then won the contest over Tasso with 52.63% of the votes in June. However, as the judiciary is independent of the executive office, it isn’t certain that the cases brought against Toledo and Tasso are examples of a powerful executive oppressing the opposition.