A group of leading Peruvian and foreign political scientists signed a statement this week to say they believe Keiko Fujimori would be the worst option as leader of Peru. The full statement reads:
“Peru is preparing for an election next June 5 in which none of the two presidential candidates exhibits the democratic credentials we would have hoped for. However, faced with the existing dilemma a choice is unavoidable and we the undersigned political scientists believe that for Keiko Fujimori to come to power would be the worst result for the country.
As political scientists we especially value democratic government, because it permits pluralism and open debate, it protects fundamental liberties and human rights, restrains opportunities for corruption and favors achieving agreements that generate development and public policies in favor of the most vulnerable population.
Owing to these considerations of principle we are very concerned about the election of Ms Fujimori as President of the Republic, as it will constitute a vindication of her father’s government which, precisely, wiped out democracy in Peru and imposed an authoritarian regime that committed crimes against humanity as policy organized from the height of power and turned exclusion, patronage, abuse and corruption into its principal mechanisms of government.
The current Fujimori campaign, unfortunately, has not broken away from the practices that we deplored in the Alberto Fujimori government. In the past several weeks we have seen how their spokespersons have praised, justified or minimized these practices, which makes it impossible for us to believe that Ms. Fujimori represents a different and democratic government. Therefore, and because we believe that the defense of democratic values is fundamental to our commitment to Peru, we declare that we are against Keiko Fujimori’s candidacy.
Lastly, independently of who wins the presidential elections, we believe that we will need to remain alert to any attempt to act above the rule of law and democratic institutions.”
(signed)
Rolando Ames, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Julio Cotler, Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Henry Pease, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Francisco Miró Quesada, Diario El Comercio
Martín Tanaka, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Carlos Alza, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Rosa Alayza, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Mariana Alvarado, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Jorge Aragón, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Omar Awapara, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Rodrigo Barrenechea, Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Fabiola Bazo
Jo-Marie Burt, George Mason University
Maxwell Cameron, University of British Columbia
Julio F. Carrión, University of Delaware
Catherine Conaghan, Queen’s University
John Crabtree, Oxford University
Eduardo Dargent, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Henry Dietz, University of Texas at Austin
Joanna Drzewieniecki,
Graciela Ducantenzeiler, Université de Montréal
Romeo Grompone, Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Carlos Indacochea, The George Washington University
Farid Kahatt, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Charles Kenney, University of Oklahoma
Denise Ledgard, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Steven Levitsky, Harvard University
Cynthia McClintock, The George Washington University
Andrés Mejía Acosta, University of Sussex
Carlos Meléndez, University of Notre Dame
Cynthia Milton, Université de Montréal
Paula Muñoz, University of Texas at Austin
Philip Oxhorn, Mc Gill University
Simón Pachano, FLACSO (Quito)
Luis Pásara, Universidad de Salamanca
Kenneth Roberts, Cornell University
María Ana Rodríguez, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Eduardo Romero, Nonprofit Roundtable of Greater Washington
Mariela Szwarcberg, University of Chicago
Carlos Torres Vitolas, London School of Economics
Jorge Valladares, University of Essex
Sofia Vera, Instituto de Estudios Peruanos
Alberto Vergara, Université de Montréal
Ah, leftist academics. What would you expect?
Just that, smart comments. So sad for Peru to be on this situation.
Mario Vargas Llosa signed a similar form and it meant nothing. I have read this letter, and again it means nothing to me. Nice try though! I’m voting for the better government plan and it’s with Keiko Fujimori and so is my family (big family in Lima, Ancash, and New York/ Connecticut). We await Keiko’s victory.
I’m a Peruvian College student, and I say NO A KEIKO. Thanks God I educated myself in a good way. Most of the Peruvian people I know will vote for Ollanta, but I understand Why? Most of them don’t have a College education, and the only think they care is work, and try to get some free benefits from the state, even that they have some money to live in CT with dignity. They need extra money to build they houses, appartments, in Peru. All these people lie to the government in different ways. Unfortunately, the corrupcion is in their Peruvian genes, we learned that since the day we borned(in Peru). I never like corruption, that’s why I have so many arguments with people, even my own family since I was a child. I’m 38 years old now. I moved to USA, CT 11 years ago, and I’m one who pay a big price to defend my rights. I was abused by my Asian ex-husband,and the police never care about me. And now I live with paraplegic for the rest of my live. I have political asylum here, and I hope one day I can visit my Peru, and see a democratic country, without the Fujimory Family in the power…thanks.
You are an ignorant supporter of the corrupt “thingy” (alias cosito) that is involved in the odebrecht corruption with proofs. You must relinquish from your mistake of hate and request pardon from the Fujimore Family heir to the people’s choice that you antidemocratic racist made a complot against as the caviar mafia that signed such wrong manifest of fujiphobic hate.
I’m not a Peruvian, nor am I or anyone of my family is from peru. However, I do have friends that are born from Peru and are peruvians. I don’t know much about the presidential issues, but I do know that Fujimori has a lot of negative and corrupted background. She should of been disqualified. I understand that she’s a female, and that everyone is excited about having a female president. But what I don’t understand is how people can trust that she wont do what her father did. Peru has poverty as well as many other countries. I don’t think that she will address the major issues that is more important, I think that her priority is going to be her dads freedom. I hope that everyone is thinking about what the negatives and positives are…and hopefully, she can get impeached, if she doesn’t give the country what she promised.