The Besieged Polis Citizen Insecurity and Democracy in Latin America

Organization of American States The Besieged Polis Citizen Insecurity and Democracy in Latin America Kevin Casas-Zamora JUNE 2013 Table of Contents Acknowledgments . iii Disclaimer . iv Chapter 1—On the Relationship between Citizen Insecurity and Democracy . 1 Introduction . 1 What do we understand citizen insecurity to be? . 2 How does the state of citizen insecurity affect democracy? . 4 How does the state of democracy affect citizen insecurity? . 11 Where to now? . 13 Chapter 2—Anatomy of an Epidemic: Violence and Citizen Insecurity in Latin America . 15 Introduction . 15 The objective dimension: crime and victimization . 16 A look at factors associated with the objective dimension of insecurity . .24 The subjective dimension: fear and perceived insecurity . 31 Findings and final reflections . 36 Chapter 3—Can We Live Together? Citizen Insecurity as a Threat to Democratic Coexistence – with Consuelo Amat . 38 Introduction . 38 The variables and the model . 39 Analysis and results . 44 Findings and final reflections . 50 Chapter 4—The Wounded Leviathan: Crime, the State, and the Erosion of the Monopoly on Legitimate Violence . 53 Introduction . 53 The proliferation of private security services . 54 The persistence of lynching . 62 Areas of contested sovereignty . 66 Findings and final reflections . 73 Chapter 5—There Is a Way Out: Some Proposals to Address Citizen Insecurity in Latin America . 75 Bibliography . 93 Appendix . 105 Cover photos credit: Carol Garcia/SECOM, accessed via Fotos GOVBA on Flickr, available under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license The Besieged Polis: Citizen Insecurity and Democracy in Latin America Latin America Initiative at Brookings ii Acknowledgements any people collaborated in the preparation of this study . I would like to express my deep Mappreciation for the research assistance provided by Diana Padilla, Fernanda López, Raquel Chanto, and Consuelo Amat . Consuelo, in fact, did much more than support my research . Her con- siderable talents, which have now migrated to a very lucky Yale University, were instrumental in putting together Chapter 3 and, hence, she is named as its co-author . I also appreciate the useful comments made by Juan Carlos Garzón, Álvaro Briones, Ted Piccone, Diana Villiers Negroponte, and Carol Graham on an earlier version of this text . Added to those were comments made by those who attended the Third Meeting of Ministers Responsible for Public Security in the Americas (MISPA III), held in Port of Spain, Trinidad & Tobago, in November 2011, where the original version of this monograph was presented . Earlier versions of chapters 2, 3, and 5 were presented by the author at various meetings and seminars in San Salvador, El Salvador; San José, Costa Rica; La Jolla, California; and Washington, D C. ., including two at the headquarters of the Organization of American States (OAS) . I wrote this study while a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution . I cannot adequately explain here what a wonderful and supportive environment Brookings provides for policy-oriented re- searchers . I would like to express my profound gratitude to all my former colleagues at Brook- ings . The assistance of the OAS Secretariat for Multidimensional Security’s Department of Public Security was also essential throughout the entire process, particularly the support (and infinite patience) of Adam Blackwell, Christopher Hernández, Julio Rosenblatt, Ana María Díaz, Adriana Frenchia, and, very especially, Adriana Mejía, who more than anyone insisted that this text see the light of day . Janelle Conaway did a superb job with the translation of this document, originally drafted in Spanish . None of this would have been possible without the generous financial support of the Government of Spain (through the OAS Spanish Fund from the Ministry of External Affairs and Cooperation), which once again has made it clear that it is genuinely committed to the discus- sion of the issues that are central to the development of Latin America . The same applies to the funders of the Latin America Initiative at the Brookings Institution, particularly the Liberty Mutual Group and a very kind donor that would like to remain anonymous . All of them deserve my gratitude and much of any merit this work may have . I take sole responsibility, however, for any errors and for what is said here . I dedicate this monograph to my daughter Annalena, with love and hope . The Besieged Polis: Citizen Insecurity and Democracy in Latin America Latin America Initiative at Brookings iii Disclaimer he author would like to emphasize that this text does not in any way represent the position Tof the Organization of American States, the OAS’ Secretary General, or any donors that have contributed to this project . Responsibility for its content is strictly the author’s . The Brookings Institution is a private non-profit organization . Its mission is to conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide innovative, practical recommendations for policy makers and the public . The conclusions and recommendations of any Brookings publication are solely those of its authors, and do not reflect the views of the Institution, its man- agement, or its other scholars . Brookings recognizes that the value it provides is in its absolute commitment to quality, indepen- dence and impact . Activities supported by its donors reflect this commitment and the analysis and recommendations are not determined or influenced by any donation . The Besieged Polis: Citizen Insecurity and Democracy in Latin America Latin America Initiative at Brookings iv Chapter 1 On the Relationship Between Citizen Insecurity and Democracy Introduction he political dimension of citizen insecurity is central to understanding the current and future Tstate of democracy in Latin America . Levels of violent crime in the region and widespread perceptions about them have clear effects on citizens’ exercise of fundamental rights and free- doms, which go to the very heart of the notion of citizenship and the democratic system . Crime and perceived insecurity also jeopardize conditions that are essential to the survival of democratic systems, such as a strong social fabric and public support for the concept of democracy and its underlying values . Finally, in different ways, crime and fear pose real threats to the state’s effective monopoly on legitimate coercion, a basic precondition for its viability . This introduction will lay out the main hypotheses regarding the effects of citizen insecurity on democratic stability, links that will then be explored in detail in later chapters . Although this study focuses on the consequences of citizen insecurity for democracy, it cannot ignore the fact that there is also a relationship in the opposite direction: citizen insecurity is, in part, a reflection of inequalities, social exclusions, and limitations in access to fundamental rights for large segments of the population . These conditions in some respects are incompatible with the notion of citizenship and the democratic ethos . This monograph will ultimately argue that the fates of citizen insecurity and democracy are inter- twined, and that the best route to a safer society passes through the consolidation of a democratic system capable of guaranteeing a broad range of rights—not just political rights, but also social and economic rights—to everyone . The text will begin with a brief disquisition on the concept of citizen insecurity, defining it from a democratic perspective—that is, as it relates to the exercise of and limitations on fundamental The Besieged Polis: Citizen Insecurity and Democracy in Latin America Latin America Initiative at Brookings 1 rights . The next two sections will analyze the two-way relationship between citizen insecurity and democracy . They first will examine four possible ways in which citizen insecurity compromises the vitality of the democratic system and second, how faults in the democratic system may end up being reflected in the phenomenon of social violence . The last section returns to this monograph’s central arguments and suggests that a commitment to human development—and to the democratic values and practices at its core—is an essential antidote to citizen insecurity . What do we understand citizen insecurity to be?1 itizen security is a limited but vital part of the broader notion of human security . In 1994, the CHuman Development Report of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) indicated: “Human security is not a concern with weapons—it is a concern with human life and dignity ”. It thus proposed an expanded notion of security—conceived for a world that had left the Cold War behind—which would give central importance to the protection of people from chronic threats such as hunger, disease, and repression, as well as from sudden and hurtful disruptions in the patterns of daily life, whether in homes, in jobs, or in communities . The concept of human security came to denote the condition of being free from fear and want . This definition was later broken down into seven dimensions, in accordance with the nature of the threats people were facing: economic security, food security, health security, environmental security, personal security, communi- ty security, and political security .2 While human security addresses forms of vulnerability that compromise the enjoyment of human rights in general, citizen security refers to specific types of vulnerability—those caused by violence and dispossession—and

Load more