Sore loser

The Economist (England)
Leaders - Mexico's contested presidential election
Aug 10th 2006

People power and its abuses

SHOW me a good loser, goes an old quip, and I’ll show you a loser. Andrés Manuel López Obrador seems to have taken this saying too much to heart. After his apparent defeat in Mexico’s presidential election on July 2nd, he is refusing to give up. He has instead called thousands of his supporters into the Zócalo, Mexico City’s main square, and Reforma, one of its principal avenues. The (peaceful) protests will continue, he vows, until the electoral authorities agree to a full recount. A fair count, he says, will reverse the result.

Is this another example, like Ukraine’s “orange revolution”, of a brave democrat mobilising “people power” in order to restore a stolen election? Hardly. Mr López Obrador may have been cheated of victory before. In 1994 he lost the governorship of Tabasco state in an election rigged by the Institutional Revolutionary Party, the ever-ruling party of the time. But Mexico has changed. Its democracy is now full-blooded but still new enough that it cannot be taken for granted. Far from strengthening Mexico’s young democracy, Mr López Obrador’s protest now threatens to undermine it.

July’s vote was close. The margin that gave Felipe Calderón of the centre-right National Action Party his apparent victory was a mere 244,000 of the 42m votes cast. But Mr López Obrador’s accusations of large-scale fraud are not supported by evidence. Observers from America and the European Union judged the vote fair. In many areas the tally was certified by his own centre-left Party of the Democratic Revolution, which scored its best-ever result in the vote for Congress.

The integrity of Mexican elections is the responsibility of two institutions, which have operated transparently and independently of the government since they were reformed in 1996. The Federal Electoral Institute runs elections and counts the votes. The results are certified by the Federal Electoral Tribunal (Trife), a seven-judge panel that has proved its impartiality in scores of local elections. Mr López Obrador had been happy to accept their authority until he learned of his likely defeat. On August 5th in a unanimous ruling the Trife judged that there were grounds for a recount at 11,839 polling stations, about 9% of the total. That is unlikely to overturn Mr Calderón’s victory, although the Trife could broaden the recount if it finds more irregularities than expected.

That ought to be the last word. The Trife is the final arbiter on electoral matters and must declare a winner (or annul the election) by September 6th. But Mr López Obrador responded to its ruling by inciting more civil disobedience. “What is going to happen if they force this result on us?” he asked his supporters. “Revolution,” they roared in answer.

No longer a friend of democracy

By mobilising people power this way Mr López Obrador is not defending democracy but attacking the institutions that underwrite it. Many Mexicans fear that he is building a mass movement to make it impossible for anyone else to govern. But it is far from clear that a majority backs him. Mr López Obrador’s fiery five-year tenure as mayor of their capital left Mexicans unsure whether he would govern as a moderniser or as a reconditioned populist. His performance since the election, especially his willingness to let Mexican democracy erode, suggests the latter. The longer he camps out in the Zócalo, the more apparent it will be that he does not deserve to be president, after this or any future election.