An anonymous comment to the previous post asks if the presidential powers are increased in the proposed constitution (CPE), relative to the existing CPE (the 2004 Constitution).
The proposed CPE mentions the presidency in several sections, of course. There are some odd points (some of the president’s powers are specified in articles preceding the introduction of the presidency). Interestingly, one of these (PA 138) deals w/ “states of exception” (these can include for natural disasters, civil war, etc.), and is listed outside of the section on the executive branch. But it actually reduces the president’s power. Currently (Article 111 & 112) allow the president to declare a state of siege that can last for 90 days & couldn’t declare another state of siege that year w/o legislative approval. The proposed CPE would limit such a declaration to 72 days, would require legislative approval after the fact, and would limit the declaration to once a year.
The 2004 CPE begins w/ descriptions of the legislature (Articles 46 to 84), before turning to the presidency (Articles 85 to 98). The proposed CPE outlines the presidency much later (PA 166 to 175).
I’ll highlight the differences, using the proposed CPE as guide:
PA 166 states that “the president, vice president, and ministers of state” comprise the executive power (Article 85 doesn’t include the vice president).
PA 167 changes the electoral system for the president (and vp). If no presidential candidate wins 50%+1, s/he wins the presidency if s/he wins at last 40% of the vote & places at least 10 points ahead of the second runner up. Otherwise, a second round election will take place. (Currently, in Article 90, if no presidential candidate wins 50%+1, the legislature chooses from among the top two candidates.)
PA 168 merely states the qualifications to run for president (age, citizenship, etc.).
PA 169 notes that presidential terms are 5 years long (same as CPE), but allows a single continuous reelection (new introduction).
PA 170 notes that in the president’s absences, executive power is transferred (as “acting president”) to the vice president, or (if the vp is unavailable) to the president of the Chamber of Deputies (Article 93 includes the president of the Senate, sandwiched between the vp & president of Deputies). It also extends the maximum length of time a president can be absent to 90 days (Article 95 only grants 5, and requires an explanation to the legislature upon return).
PA 171 notes that the president can be removed from office by death, resignation, permanent absences or impediment, criminal conviction, or recall.
PA 172 deals w/ succession, and declares that the vice president will assume the presidency & must call for new elections w/in 90 days (under Article 93 the vp becomes president through the end of the president’s original term).
PA 173 outlines the president’s “attributes”:
- “Obey and enforce the Constitution and the laws” (the CPE includes “expedite the necessary orders and decrees” among the longer explanation).
- “Maintain and preserve the unity of the Bolivian state” (new).
- “Propose and direct government and state policies” (new).
- “Direct public administration” and coordinate ministers’ actions (new).
- Direct foreign relations in various ways (broken into two powers in the CPE).
- Convoke “extraordinary” legislative sessions.
- Promulgate laws passed by the legislature (new).
- Dictate supreme decrees and resolutions (new).
- Administer the national rents.
- Present the legislature w/ a social & economic development plan (new).
- Present the legislature w/ a budget proposals & necessary modifications (not new, but here only specifies “state” whereas the previous CPE specified “national and departments”).
- Present an annual state of the union address to the legislature.
- Enforce the tribunals’ decisions.
- Decree amnesty, with the legislature’s approval (in the current CPE the legislature also has this power, but doesn’t have to approve presidential amnesties).
- Name, from among names nominated by the legislature, the comptroller general, superintendent of banks, and other similar posts (wording changes, but seems about the same).
- “Preserve the security and defense of the State” (new).
- Name armed forces chiefs.
- Name national police chief (these two were previously combined).
- Make recommendations to the legislature for military & police promotions.
- Create & maintain ports (the current CPE specified “minor” ports).
- Designate presidential representatives to the electoral court.
- Designate ministers of state, respecting ethnic & gender equity (new).
- Designate the general procurator (new).
- Present emergency economic projects for legislative consideration (new).
- Act as captain general of the armed forces, and use these “to defend the State, its independence, and territorial integrity” (the rank of captain general is specified in Article 97, but it doesn’t include any statement of purpose)
- Declare states of exception (new, see above).
- Act as maximum authority of the National Agrarian Reform Service.
PA 174 states that the president can be absent on official business w/o requiring legislative permission for a maximum of 10 days (see notes on PA 170).
PA 175 specifies the vice president’s powers (something previous CPE didn’t do), which are:
- Assume the presidency in the president’s absence.
- Coordinate relations between the executive, legislature, and autonomous governments.
- Participate in cabinet meetings.
- Assist the president in managing the direction & policies of government.
- Participate jointly w/ the president in crafting foreign policy & naming ambassadors.
Clearly, the vice presidency is heavily strengthened in the proposed CPE. It went from being a shadow position w/ few real powers to one approaching “co-presidency” (in foreign policy, especially).
There are also a few more limitations placed on the president’s power, as well some legislative checks. But some of the new “attributes” are problematic because of their vagueness. Some of these things (decree powers) already existed, of course. But now they’re enshrined in the constitution (not sure that’s a good thing, I’d rather see decree powers scaled back). Others (“coordinate ministers’ actions”) are new, but always assumed, and not troublesome. Some may also object to the vague statements like “maintain and preserve the unity of the Bolivian state.” Whether these are rhetorical flourishes or could be used by presidents to cover less savory practices remains to be seen, of course.
It’s important to remember, of course, the Latin American presidents in general are more (much more!) powerful than the US president—relative to their legislatures. Sure, the US has been recently defined by the “(new) imperial presidency.” But that fails in comparison the kinds of powers Latin American presidents have typically had. The proposed CPE (for all its problems) does seem to scale back some of those powers from the president (e.g. by giving the legislature the power to nominate candidates to executive appointment posts or by making the vp a virtual “co-president” in foreign relations). And despite some troubling additions, it’s hardly a document designed to make the president all powerful.
