[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 85 (Monday, May 17, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2541-S2542]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EL SALVADOR
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I want to call attention to recent events
in El Salvador which have caused international concern, including in
the U.S. Congress.
I was a Senator in the 1980s, when social injustices and
authoritarian regimes in El Salvador led to a brutal civil war that
lasted 12 years. I traveled there during that period when the United
States was supporting the Salvador Armed Forces, despite their history
of corruption and collusion with death squads that carried out
political assassinations with impunity.
Finally, in 1992, after tens of thousands of lives lost and
atrocities including the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero and
six Jesuit priests and their housekeeper and her daughter by the
Salvadoran Army, the two sides signed the Peace Accords that ended the
war. Those Accords failed to solve the country's historical problems,
and the leaders of the Arena and FMLN parties failed to put
implementation of the Accords above their own corrupt, political
ambitions, for which they ultimately lost the support of the Salvadoran
people. But the Accords did establish the foundation for democracy,
including a clear separation of powers with checks and balances as well
as a limited constitutional role for the armed forces and the newly
formed civilian police to avoid ever again being used for political
purposes or repression.
I mention this history and the price in human suffering that was paid
for the chance to build a peaceful, democratic society in El Salvador,
at a time when key elements of the Peace Accords are under assault from
within the government itself and President Nayib Bukele.
In February 2020, in a show of force designed to intimidate the
Salvadoran Congress, which at that time his party did not control,
President Bukele, accompanied by heavily armed soldiers, occupied the
legislative chamber to demand passage of a law to pay for new
equipment. Fifteen months later, after winning a supermajority in the
Congress, he turned his attention to the judicial branch.
Under the Peace Accords, the Office of the Attorney General, formerly
an appendage of the Executive that was used for repression and
persecution of political opponents, became an independent institution,
acting as a fourth branch of government and appointed by a majority of
Congress to a 3-year term. Since the Congress is also elected for 3-
year terms, every Congress gets to appoint an Attorney General. The
President has no say in the matter.
The Attorney General can be removed by a majority of Congress for
just cause and in accordance with due process. Attorney General Raul
Melara's term was to end on January 6, 2022, just 7 months from now,
and the newly elected Congress could have selected someone to replace
him after
[[Page S2542]]
that date. However, on May 1, President Bukele's supermajority in
Congress summarily removed Mr. Melara without cause and appointed a
political loyalist as Melara's replacement, contrary to the
requirements of the Constitution and raising serious doubts about the
continued independence of the office.
It is notable that prior to his dismissal, the ousted Attorney
General, with U.S. support, was investigating a number of cases of
corruption against top government officials, including a multibillion-
dollar money laundering case. Then last week, in what can only be
interpreted as a flagrant attempt to shield themselves from
accountability, the Congress passed a law to provide retroactive
immunity to all government officials implicated in corruption involving
spending linked to the COVID-19 pandemic. Also last week, the Assistant
Attorney General in charge of the anti-corruption unit suddenly
resigned, for reasons that have not been explained, and was also
replaced by a Bukele loyalist.
Those actions were just the beginning. El Salvador's Supreme Court
has 15 justices elected for 9-year terms and distributed among
different chambers. Every 3 years, Congress can appoint 5 justices from
a list of 30 candidates submitted by the National Council of the
Judiciary. The President has no say in the matter.
Justices can be assigned to and transferred from any chamber, except
justices in the Constitutional Chamber who are appointed by the
Congress strictly for that chamber and cannot be transferred. The chief
justice of the Supreme Court is also selected by Congress from among
the five members of the Constitutional Chamber.
The newly elected Congress would have elected five justices from
different chambers of the Supreme Court in June from the already
submitted list of candidates. However, on May 1, the Congress removed
all five justices from the Constitutional Chamber and their
substitutes, without cause or due process, arguing that their rulings
were biased and contrary to the government's policies. Out of those
justices only one would have completed his term in June. The other four
from the Constitutional Chamber were serving terms until 2029.
Apparently, the role of the judiciary as a separate branch of
government that serves as an independent check on Executive power in a
democracy is unacceptable to President Bukele and his congressional
allies.
The Congress appointed new justices but not from a list of candidates
submitted by the National Council of the Judiciary. So not only was the
sudden removal of justices unconstitutional; so was the appointment of
new justices.
The Constitutional Chamber had played an essential, historical role
as a check on the Executive's abuse of authority, which is plainly why
its justices were targeted for removal. The chamber often rebuked the
Executive for overreaching in its actions, including the Bukele-ordered
military occupation of the Congress in February 2020. Thus, by removing
the Attorney General and the Supreme Court justices, the Congress gave
President Bukele control of all branches of government, creating a
situation in which corruption can flourish with impunity.
I have recounted these events because they have created a crisis that
could have profound consequences for El Salvador, and for U.S.-
Salvadoran relations. My concern is not only what it means for
democracy in that country but what it could also mean for its economy
and the livelihoods of its people. The stifling of democracy ultimately
deprives already desperate people--suffering from the COVID pandemic,
two hurricanes in 2020, and gang violence--of any hope their lives will
get better, and this desperation is a major driver of migration to the
U.S. border.
The United States has always been El Salvador's largest trading
partner and its largest donor. CAFTA--the Central America Free Trade
Agreement--established not only trade preferences but labor, health,
and environmental standards. The results have been significant.
Forty-five percent of El Salvador's exports go to the United States
under CAFTA, which amounts to $2.6 billion a year.
Thirty-five percent of its imports come from the United States,
totaling $3.5 billion a year.
There are nearly 3 million Salvadorans living in the United States,
of whom 200,000 have temporary protected status. Collectively, they
send $6 billion each year in remittances to their relatives in El
Salvador, which amounts to 25 percent of the country's GDP.
On top of that, the United States has provided El Salvador with more
than $700 million in aid through USAID, the Millennium Challenge
Corporation, and other agencies in the last 5 years alone. Much of the
progress made with those funds is now at risk of being washed away.
The largest exporters in El Salvador are U.S. corporations, which are
also the largest employers in El Salvador.
President Bukele knows that his dictatorial actions are a direct
challenge to the United States and to the Biden administration's
emphasis on democracy, human rights, and combating corruption in the
region. Faced with criticism from the White House and the U.S.
Congress, he may point to China as an alternative to the United States,
as if a knight in shining armor from Beijing can gallop in and solve El
Salvador's problems.
But the people of El Salvador have no connection with China, and they
are not about to cast aside their longstanding relationship with the
United States. Trade with China has always been one-way and
characterized by dumping practices that have destroyed local industries
in El Salvador. There are no major exports from El Salvador to China
except occasional shipments of coffee and sugar. Chinese infrastructure
projects do nothing to help unemployed Salvadorians, when China sends
the steel, concrete, and even the Chinese workers to build them.
The Salvadoran private sector knows that China isn't the answer. They
know the country cannot prosper without democratic institutions and the
rule of law.
El Salvador is a sovereign country, and President Bukele was
democratically elected. He makes his own decisions. But the choices he
and his allies in the Salvadoran Congress make, that are eviscerating
El Salvador's democratic civilian institutions and empowering the armed
forces, have consequences for U.S.-Salvadoran relations. They have
consequences for our aid programs and for our support for financing for
El Salvador from the IMF, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the
World Bank and for our trade relations, and for visas.
This isn't about national sovereignty and foreign interference, as
President Bukele has falsely suggested. His actions directly affect the
United States, U.S. companies, our commercial relations, and the
welfare of millions of Salvadorans in the United States, as well as the
Salvadoran population.
I join others here and in El Salvador in urging President Bukele and
the Salvadoran Congress to reconsider their unconstitutional actions
and to restore the separation of powers and the rule of law. Don't
destroy the Peace Accords' greatest achievement. End the attacks on the
rule of law, respect the tenure of other justices and the Human Rights
Procurator, and appoint justices to the Constitutional Chamber and an
Attorney General following the established procedures and ensuring that
they are people with the necessary professional qualifications,
integrity, and independence.
____________________