Ecuadorian President, Lúcio Gutierrez has backed down and has withdrawn the state of emergency decree that he instituted on Friday. Public pressure is what appeared to have caused this shift and while I don't much care for Gutierrez, I worry about the image that this sends to nations like Ecuador: if you don't like the leader, get enough people out on the street to rally the public against him. I think that the long-term solution to situations like this is to establish strong institutions that can ensure a system of checks and balances against the likes of Gutierrez.
On the other hand, there is some lovely poetic justice in Gutierrez being ousted by popular opinion. Publius Pundit has a comprehensive roundup of the latest here.



I think I'm not following you here. Gutierrez made what appears to have been a naked power grab, dissolving the Supreme Court with the backing of the military. Popular demonstrations were the last check on his power that worked, apparently. This is at least superficially similar to lots of other revolutionary beginnings.
So what am I missing? Why is this not a good image to send to dictators and those who would join their little club?
Posted by: Kyle | April 17, 2005 at 09:54 PM
Gutierrez was fairly elected and while I think that he's pretty awful, political instability has ruled Ecuador's history. I will not be sorry to see Gutierrez go, but I think that it would be better if he was put through a constitutional process and I think that it would be better for Ecuador in the long term if they had established institutions rather than having to rely on public demonstrations to address these issues.
Posted by: Randy Paul | April 17, 2005 at 10:24 PM
Heck, as we're seeing now, formal, legally established "checks and balances" don't always work very well. I admire the Ecuadorans for caring enough.
Posted by: Brian Miller | April 18, 2005 at 12:28 PM