Bolivia's Constitution: Term Limits And Their Impact

The Bolivian Constitution has had a tumultuous history with term limits, with the country's highest court playing a pivotal role in shaping the political landscape. In 2016, a referendum was held, proposing to allow the president, Evo Morales, to run for a third consecutive term, which was rejected by a slim majority of 51.3%. However, in 2017, Bolivia's Constitutional Court ruled that term limits for all elected officials, including the president, would be scrapped, allowing Morales to run for reelection indefinitely, a decision that sparked intense debates about democracy and human rights.

The 2016 referendum

On 21 February 2016, Bolivia held a constitutional referendum to decide whether to amend Article 168 of the 2009 Constitution, which at the time limited the president and vice president to two terms in total. The referendum was proposed by the governing party, the Movement for Socialism (MAS), and would have allowed President Evo Morales and Vice President Álvaro García Linera to run for a third consecutive term (or fourth, including their pre-2009 term).

Morales had been in power since 2006, and the referendum was hotly contested. The opposition argued that Morales should not be allowed to seek reelection as it would signal the end of democracy in Bolivia. Critics feared that if Morales were to remain in power, Bolivia could become an authoritarian state like Venezuela. Supporters of Morales, including indigenous groups and some trade unions, argued that no other president had done as much to help the poor and that Morales needed more time to implement further social reforms.

In the run-up to the referendum, opponents of Morales claimed that he had fathered an out-of-wedlock child, which was later revealed to be "mostly fake news". Referendum supporters claimed that these allegations hurt Morales in the polls.

Ultimately, the proposal to amend the constitution was voted down by a slim majority of 51.3%. This was the third narrow defeat for Morales, largely due to the right-wing opposition's success in convincing voters that the Morales government was corrupt. Despite the referendum results, Morales and the MAS continued to push for the removal of term limits.

The 2017 court ruling

In 2017, Bolivia's highest court, the Plurinational Constitutional Court (or Tribunal), made a ruling that struck down or scrapped the term limits for elected officials in the country's constitution. This ruling was made in response to a request by the governing party, the Movement for Socialism (MAS), to abolish term limits. The court argued that term limits violated the human rights of both Bolivian politicians to be elected and voters to choose their preferred candidates. This decision was based on the American Convention on Human Rights, a multilateral treaty to which many countries in the Americas are signatories.

The ruling allowed all elected officials, including the president, vice president, state governors, state assembly members, mayors, and municipal councilors, to run for office indefinitely, rather than being limited to the two consecutive terms permitted under the 2009 Constitution. This had significant implications for President Evo Morales, who had been in power since 2006 and could now seek reelection for a fourth term in 2019.

The 2017 ruling was met with strong opposition and criticism from various quarters. Conservative opposition leaders, such as Samuel Doria Medina and Jorge Quiroga, called the decision a "coup d'etat" and a "blow to democracy," respectively. They argued that the court had overstepped its legal bounds and ignored the will of the people as expressed in the 2016 referendum. The head of the Organization of American States, responsible for enforcing the American Convention on Human Rights, also disagreed with the court's interpretation, stating that the treaty does not envision the right to perpetual power.

Protests and rallies were held by opponents of the ruling, calling for respect for the referendum results and expressing concerns about the concentration of power and potential authoritarianism. However, supporters of Morales celebrated the decision, highlighting his work for the poor and social reforms. The ruling also sparked debates about the importance of term limits within democracies and the potential for democratic backsliding.

The Movement for Socialism

The roots of MAS can be traced to the closures of the Bolivian Mining Corporation and the shutdown of various mines during the 1980s. Many former miners became coca farmers, and the growth of this community resulted in a sharp increase in organisations such as the Confederación Sindical Única de Trabajadores Campesinos de Bolivia (CSUTCB). The movement built alliances with other indigenous groups and mobilised joint protests, including a 1992 campaign titled "500 years of resistance of the indigenous peoples".

In the 1990s, MAS sought to enter the political arena, but it faced challenges due to Bolivia's electoral laws. In the 1999 municipal elections, MAS borrowed the registration of an inactive faction of the Bolivian Socialist Falange, adopting the name Movimiento al Socialismo (Movement for Socialism). In 2002, Morales was expelled from parliament after being accused of masterminding violent confrontations between police and coca growers. However, this expulsion contributed to the political popularity of MAS.

In the 2002 national elections, MAS expanded its influence beyond its peasant base. Morales stood as the presidential candidate, and the party appealed to supporters of Marxist left groups and the urban middle classes. MAS championed 'national sovereignty', denouncing US interventions in Bolivian affairs and portraying the political elite as 'traitors'. The appeal of MAS was enhanced by the intervention of US ambassadors, who threatened to cut economic aid if Morales won.

In the 2005 general election, Evo Morales won a clear majority with 53.7% of the valid presidential vote. MAS obtained 43.5% of the valid uninominal vote, securing a strong presence in the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate. Since taking office, the MAS government has emphasised modernisation, industrialisation, increased state intervention in the economy, social and cultural inclusion, and redistribution of revenue from natural resources through various social service programs.

In 2016, a constitutional referendum was held in Bolivia, proposing to allow the president and vice president to run for a third consecutive term. This amendment was sponsored by MAS, but it was voted down by a slim majority (51.3%). Despite this setback, MAS persisted in its efforts to abolish term limits. In 2017, the party applied to the Plurinational Constitutional Court, and the court ruled in their favour, citing the American Convention on Human Rights. This ruling allowed Morales to run for re-election in 2019, sparking controversy and concerns about the concentration of power.

MAS has been characterised as a "new indigenous nationalism" that combines elements of indigenismo, nationalism, and "miners' Marxism". It seeks to construct a plurinational state based on the autonomies of indigenous peoples, criticising the modern nation-state as inherently racist and a construct of 'internal colonialism'. MAS's policies have included the nationalisation of key industries, redistribution of agricultural land, increased taxes on the wealthy, and aggressive social spending to reduce poverty and inequality.

While MAS has faced criticism and protests during its time in power, it has maintained a strong support base, particularly among indigenous groups and some trade unions. The party's success in improving economic conditions and prioritising indigenous rights has contributed to its enduring appeal in Bolivian politics.

The role of the Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal

The Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal (TCP) is a national court in Bolivia that is tasked with interpreting the constitution and ensuring that the laws, government powers, and treaties are in line with the country's 2009 Constitution. The TCP was established by the 2009 Constitution, and it replaced the Constitutional Court of Bolivia, which operated from 1999 to 2011. The TCP is headquartered in Sucre and consists of seven members who are chosen through a national nonpartisan election. The tribunal's powers are outlined in Articles 196–204 of the 2009 Constitution, as well as in the Law of the Judicial Organ (Law 025) and the Law of the Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal (Law 027).

One of the most significant rulings of the TCP was in November 2017, when it lifted the constitutional limits on the re-election of the president and other elected officials. This ruling allowed President Evo Morales to run for a fourth consecutive term in 2019 and sparked controversy and protests from those who saw it as a "blow to democracy". The court argued that term limits violated the human rights of politicians to be elected and of voters to choose their representatives. This ruling was based on the American Convention on Human Rights, which the court interpreted as prioritising political rights.

The TCP's decision had a significant impact on Bolivian politics, as it overruled the results of a February 2016 referendum in which a slim majority had voted against changing the constitution to allow Morales to run for a fourth term. This referendum was preceded by a smear campaign involving allegations of an out-of-wedlock child and influence-peddling, which supporters of Morales claimed had influenced the vote.

The Bolivian Constitution of 2009

The 2009 Bolivian Constitution, which was approved in a referendum, introduced a two-term limit for the president. This was a change from the 1967 constitution, which stated that presidents could serve a maximum of two terms, but not consecutively.

Article 168 of the 2009 constitution allows the President and Vice-President to put themselves forward for re-election only once, limiting the number of terms to two. However, in 2014, President Evo Morales was allowed to run for a third term. This was because the constitutional court ruled that his first term, which began in 2006, should not be counted as it took place before the 2009 constitution was enacted.

In 2015, Morales's party, the Movement for Socialism (MAS), sponsored an effort to amend Article 168 to allow him to run for a fourth term. This proposal was put to a referendum in February 2016, which was voted down by a slim majority of 51.3%. Despite this, in November 2017, the Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal ruled that term limits for all elected officials, including the president, vice president, state governors, state assembly members, mayors, and municipal councilors, were to be scrapped. The tribunal justified its decision based on the American Convention on Human Rights' interpretation of political rights, arguing that term limits violated candidates' human rights.

This ruling was controversial and was criticised by some as a blow to democracy and a coup d'etat. However, supporters of Morales argued that the referendum result was influenced by a smear campaign against him and that no other president had done as much to help the poor.

Frequently asked questions