|
Uruguay Democratic Consolidation, 1985-90
The Sanguinetti Administration
The Sanguinetti government pursued a moderate and
pragmatic
approach to the nation's problems. Having inherited a
US$4.9
billion foreign debt accrued almost entirely during the
military
regime, the Sanguinetti government focused on foreign
trade. On
April 1, 1986, after several months of negotiations among
the
principal parties--the ruling Colorados, the Blancos, the
Broad
Front, and the UC--the leaders signed an agreement to
promote the
country's economic and social development.
In August 1986, Sanguinetti, with the backing of his
Colorado
Party, submitted an unrestricted amnesty bill for the
military
and police to the General Assembly as an extension of the
pardon
granted to the Tupamaros. The government was able to
obtain only
fifty-five of the necessary sixty-six votes, however, so
the
proposal was rejected. The ruling Colorado Party then
voted in
favor of the bill sponsored by the National Party, which
recommended trials only for those responsible for serious
human
rights violations. The Senate rejected the National Party
bill as
well, setting the stage for the worst political crisis in
twenty
months of democratic government. Lacking a majority in
either of
the two chambers, Sanguinetti met with opposition National
Party
leader Ferreira to attempt to reach a political solution
on a
number of points: the human rights issue; the extreme lack
of
expediency in General Assembly deliberations; interparty
differences over the proposed national budget; and
frequent
clashes between the government and the opposition. In the
first
step leading to a resolution, the government and the
National
Party reached an agreement on the budget report, which the
General Assembly subsequently approved.
In December 1986, after acrimonious debate (including
fistfights in the Chamber of Representatives), the General
Assembly approved the government's alternative to an
amnesty,
consisting of a "full stop" to the examination of human
rights
violations committed by 360 members of the armed forces
and
police during the military regime. According to Amnesty
International, thirty-two Uruguayan citizens
"disappeared," and
thousands were victims of persecution and torture during
that
period. Groups opposed to what they called the "impunity"
law--
including the MNR, the Broad Front, the Tupamaros, the UC,
and
the most important labor confederation--launched a
campaign,
spearheaded by the MNR, to force a referendum on the
issue. Led
by human rights activists, university professors, and
artists,
these groups laboriously collected the required 555,701
"recall"
signatures, all of which had to be certified by the
Electoral
Court. The measure carried by only 230 signatures.
According to
the constitution, the signatures of at least 25 percent of
the
electorate were needed for the holding of a referendum to
revoke
a law passed by the General Assembly.
Those who favored keeping the full-stop law--including
the
ruling Colorado Party and the Ferreira-led For the
Fatherland
(the principal National Party faction)--argued that the
amnesty
had given the country four years of stability and military
obedience to democratic rule. They warned that a repeal
could
spark an army revolt. Nevertheless, the MRB supported the
call
for a referendum on the full-stop law. In the obligatory
April
16, 1989, referendum--in which 85 percent of the
population
participated--Uruguayans voted by a decisive 57 percent to
43
percent to keep the full-stop law in effect and thereby
maintain
a peaceful democratic transition. Although the
referendum's
aftermath was characterized by tranquillity and a spirit
of
reconciliation, it highlighted Uruguay's growing
generation gap.
Approximately 75 percent of Montevideo residents between
eighteen
and twenty-nine voted against the full-stop law.
Data as of December 1990
|
