Dissolution of Parliament: Substantial differences between the actions of Castillo in Peru and Lasso in Ecuador

Amidst all the options considered as a way out of the political storm that is rocking Ecuador, yesterday President Guillermo Lasso resorted to a situation without precedent in the country: he decreed the so-called “cross death” and dissolved the National Assembly. In an attempt to save himself from being thrown out of the impeachment trial on fraud charges. Ecuador’s right-wing president’s drowning room sparks left-wing ex-president’s four-hour frenzy Pedro Castillo He tried to block his exit by shutting down Congress last December, a drastic move that ultimately left him behind bars. However, the cases of these countries differ in broad ways.

“He The environment is similar But in the sense that two presidents have had very low approval ratings and a struggling Congress The difference is that Ecuador’s president has broader powers to shut down Congress than Peru”, details Desam Nicholas Saltias, Intelligence Division Inspector Economist For Latin America and the Caribbean.

In a speech broadcast to the nation by the national network at seven o’clock on Wednesday morning, Lasso announced that he would “sign Executive Order 741 with the intention of dissolving the National Assembly and requiring the National Electoral Commission to call elections.” He considered it “best to give him (…) Constitutional solution to political crisis and internal turmoil Ecuador supports and returns to the Ecuadorian people the power to decide their future in the next elections.

The announcement came less than 24 hours after he defended himself before National Assembly lawmakers. Accusation The focus was on allegations of corruption to avoid irregularities in the contracts signed between the national crude oil transport company Flobec and Amazon Tankers.

The researchers were consulted by Nation First, I agree that Lasso’s decision is based on an appeal protected by appeal Article 148 2008 Constitution From Ecuador. Known as “Death to the Cross”Can be used only once in the first three years of government if the head of state deems that certain conditions such as “severe political crisis” and “internal chaos” are met.

In this process, not only the legislative but also the executive is abdicated. Next election The National Election Council expects August 20 and October 15, if the second round is held. The people of Ecuador will elect representatives to the Assembly and a new president to finish this term in May 2025.

“In the case of Ecuador one cannot speak of a ‘self-coup’. Everything that is happening is a process explained in the Constitution,” he told this media in a telephonic conversation. Regis DantoiCoordinator of Political Science at the University of Quito, unlike the term used in relation to Castillo’s decision.

“This is a constitutional process that was planned when they changed the constitution in Ecuador in 2008, so this situation was assessed by the legislators when changing the text. So, despite the political parties that complain, all we see is a process that respects the provisions of the Ecuadorian constitution,” says Tantoy.

“Lasso followed established company practices,” Pedro Castillo said.Without any constitutional justification, it concentrated power in the executive and attempted to dissolve legislative and judicial powers. According to Peruvian researcher Carlos Melendez, associate professor at the University of Diego Portales (Chile) and academic at the Center for the Study of Conflict and Social Cohesion (COES), described the constitutional settlement in Ecuador as leaving. “The Controversial Edge of Interpretation”.

Article 134 of the Peruvian Constitution gives the president the power to dissolve Congress only “if it has censured or disapproved of the two Houses of Ministers.” That condition was not met in Castillo’s case. “That’s why it’s a self-conspiracy,” Melendez says.

The Magna Carta describes that the presidential executive order must include “a call for the election of a new Congress.”

Historically, Saltias highlights that in 2018 the Peruvian Congress followed the provisions of the constitution and was legally dissolved during his presidency. Martin Vizcarra used the appeal after the second vote of no confidence. On the other hand, Castillo’s “attempted self-coup” is “similar to what former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori did in 1992,” he added.

“Impeachment of the President is easy in both cases, but the powers of the President are not the same in both the constitutions.”, stands for LA NACION Maria Victoria MurilloDirector of the Institute of Latin American Studies at Columbia University.

Murillo notes that it remains to be seen if these two cases exist “The beginning of a wave In this the conflict between the Congress and the President reaches a critical stage.

Although both Peru and Ecuador have a long history of crisis between short-term changes of powers and administrators, “tensions between presidents and Congress, Especially in these systems where there is only one cameraThey’re getting more complicated, and we’ll have to see what happens,” says Murillo. “In the economic tailwind of the early 2000s, it’s hard for governing parties to get re-elected and gain majority control of Congress. So that can create tension.”

Castillo, a former rural schoolteacher, deepened Peru’s political crisis by announcing just hours before facing a third presidential vacancy process promoted by opposition lawmakers. Dissolution of the Congress of the Republic, establishment of an “Extraordinary Emergency Government” and call for electionsPeru Libre, the party that brought him to power, denounced the coup as a coup.

Unlike the Ecuadorian case, in Peru the parliament approved Castillo’s decision by 101 votes (out of a total of 130). Removal of the PresidentA few hours after the national chain of emergency polls and the Presidential Proclamation were rejected by the armed forces.

Pictures from the end of one of the most tumultuous days of Peruvian democracy showed the president detained in the headquarters of Lima province, while his vice president, Tina PolwarteHe was sworn in as the new head of state.

“Since these are two different cases, the parliaments also acted differently. As in the case of Peru This was an unconstitutional move, as the Peruvian legislature had all the power to disapprove Castillo; This is not the case with Los. Although some sectors in Ecuador, mainly the Christian Social Party, expressed their disagreement with Lasso’s action and reacted to sanction him, they did not represent a majority voice in the Ecuadorian legislature. The facts are imposed on Ecuador because it has been a regulated activity since 2008, Melendez points out.

Peru’s Court of Appeals upheld it Castillo should remain in custody As of December 2025, he has been accused of corruption, money laundering and directing public works contracts from Casa de Pizarro, which he categorically denies.

Meanwhile, Ecuador remains in anticipation as events unfold, with the arrival of Rafael Correa a major question mark over Lasso’s potential candidacy for re-election as president.

“He has every right to stand in the election. “It is an interesting scenario to think that being still innocent, he has all political rights and he can complete his term till 2025,” Dantoi said. Nation.

Minutes after using the “cross death,” Lasso signed a tax reform decree—under the same article of the constitution—that extended the ceiling on tax deductions based on the number of family members, giving Dantoi “It can be seen as a way to improve their image and their willingness to stand for election.”

Can Lasso be sued? While it is debatable whether “the president met the conditions for shutting down Congress,” regarding his description of “severe political crisis and internal turmoil,” Saltias notes that “the article’s key phrase [de la Constitución] It is in your judgment, therefore It seems very difficult for the President’s decision to be passed into law.