Dismayed, angry, that’s how we Ecuadorians are. But the outrage generated by a political assassination of this magnitude should not blind us. They have deprived thousands of the right to life, but they cannot deprive us of the right to distrust. Here I propose a contextual analysis to interpret the logic behind the political assassination of presidential candidate Fernando Villavicencio.
The activation of the political assassination is part of the macabre sequence the country has been witnessing since January 2018, when the first car bomb exploded at the police station in San Lorenzo, Esmeraldas province. Since then, the upward spiral of criminal violence has not stopped: Last year, Ecuador reached the highest murder rate in its history: 26.6 per 100,000 inhabitants. And this year it could be 40.
The purpose of all political assassinations is to “promote” or “frustrate” certain policies, values, practices, or norms related to a community’s way of life. With Villavicencio’s death, goals are achieved in both directions.
On the one hand, the organized crime networks that have infiltrated the state apparatus prevent Villavicencio from continuing to be the most recalcitrant prosecutor of political-criminal relations. Their documented complaints, filed with the Attorney General’s Office, target highly sensitive economic sectors such as the oil industry, energy sector, mining and drug trafficking. They also prevent him from attaining the presidency of the Republic and fulfilling his campaign promise: “No Mafias.”
But Villavicencio’s death must also be interpreted in the other direction. His assassination furthered the militaristic “War on Drugs” strategy implemented by Guillermo Lasso’s government with the support of the United States. Therefore, the candidatures offering a “strong hand” are strengthened like never before.
In a region like Latin America, weary from the failure of the “war on drugs” that has left a trail of death and great fortune in the shadow of the political power of the moment, common sense dictated a change of strategy. And some of that happened in that short campaign. The public debate was anchored not exclusively in insecurity and violence, but in the economic policies of the new government. But recent political assassinations exert an insurmountable pull on the security agenda.
I suspect that the political assassination of the mayor of Manta (Manabí) on July 25 and of Fernando Villavicencio in Quito (Pichincha) on August 9 has a clear political-electoral background. Guayas, Pichincha and Manabí are the most populous provinces in Ecuador and, with the exception of Guayas, the other two had not experienced such an acute episode of criminal violence.
The ample evidence of criminals infiltrating state security institutions explains why prison massacres continue, and I suspect they also explain why Fernando Villavicencio was so easily murdered despite being in police custody.
The successful presidential candidacy will unleash a frightened and confused society.
Luis Córdova Alarcón is director of the research program “Order, Conflict and Violence” at the Central University of Ecuador.