CARACAS, Venezuela — It used to be the threat of communism that provided the cover for Latin American coups and dictatorships. If some army officer or civilian plutocrat could label opponents as Marxist-Leninist it justified almost anything, including the overthrow of elected governments.
Now, there's a new label, a new justification for attacking government institutions, even democratic ones. From Tierra del Fuego to the Rio Grande, for good and bad, the watchword is now corruption.
Sitting and former presidents have been thrown out of office or stand accused of corruption in Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, Costa Rica, Panama and Bolivia. In Guatemala and Peru, leaders have justified the suspension of democratic institutions in the name of combatting corruption.
The growing attention focused on official conduct is a two-edged sword. On the one hand, long-dominated or timid legislatures are showing independence and accountability, while courts and public officials are beginning to act on behalf of the law and the citizenry.
On the other, the demagogic use of corruption charges by ambitious politicians, would-be despotic presidents and entrenched business interests threatens to create instability and actually thwart the will of the electorate.
There can be no questioning that corruption has mocked and retarded Latin American democracy. Nor can there be any question that the current wave of anti-corruption efforts has major, positive elements in strengthening democracy and its institutions.
So it sounds good--fighting corruption in a region of the world marked throughout its history by some of the sorriest examples of government and ruling class thievery and abuse of power.
"There is a general approval of the idea of cleaning up politics," Alexandre Barros, a Brazilian political expert, said in a telephone interview. "I think the overall mood is, 'Gee, we are getting back to law and order.' "
For Richard Millet, a scholar at the University of Miami's North-South Center, the anti-corruption movement is the sign of a maturing democratic commitment and the end of an era of centralized, presidential rule.
"Finally, we are getting elected congresses acting as a limit to presidential abuse," he said. "It also shows a surprising degree of judicial independence . . . and the reversal of the attitude whereby no one ever questioned the right of a president to steal."
