Maybe it has something to with the way financial institutions are run in this country, but Jamaican bankers seem rather fond of the ‘benevolent dictatorship’ concept. A few years ago it was then CIBC head Al Webb making the call. Now it is BNS boss William Clarke suggesting it as a possible solution to Jamaica’s problems.

To be sure he is only expressing the thoughts of many on the cocktail and verandah circuit, whose arguments go something like this. “Jamaicans are too easy going to compete in the ruthless global market. Only a maximum leader brooking no dissent can make us a disciplined hard working people. And human rights are a luxury this country cannot afford, for only a merciless crackdown can eliminate crime. But when the proper habits have been inculcated in the masses we can dispense with the iron fist and return to democracy.”

Then they trot out Lee Kuan Yew and sometimes Pinochet as fine examples of strong one party rule, forgetting of course that ‘good strong guys’ are extremely rare while the list of disastrous tyrants who have set their countries back decades is almost endless. Hitler, Stalin, Peron, Castro, Pol Pot, Amin, Marcos, Mobutu, Sukarno, Saddam Hussein and Mugabe are only a few. A country never knows in advance what type of dictator it is getting, and unfortunately the only ways to get rid of malevolent ones are assassination, revolution or civil war. At least democracy gives us a peaceful method of correcting our mistakes.

But one hardly has to study political theory or the distant past to see the absurdity of the benevolent dictator idea. Anyone who thinks the solutions for Jamaica’s problems are to be found not in liberal democracy but in a ‘man on horseback’ need only look at today’s Peru.

In 1990 Peru was bankrupt. Inflation was running at over 7,000% and queues for basic necessities were part of daily life. The government was riddled with corruption. The presidency of Alan Garcia, the young handsome “Latin American Kennedy” who swept to power in 1985, had been an unmitigated disaster.

Alberto Fujimoro was a political unknown until weeks before the 1990 vote but won a surprising victory. He quickly implemented a radical programme of free-market economic reforms, removing subsidies, privatising state-owned companies, and reducing the role of the state in almost all spheres of the economy. This shock therapy brought great hardship for ordinary Peruvians, but it ended rampant hyperinflation and paved the way for economic growth in the second half of the nineties. 

In 1992, with military backing, he dissolved the Peruvian congress and courts and seized dictatorial powers. He argued that the legislative and judiciary had hindered the security forces in their fight against the left-wing Shining Path rebels, whose 10-year insurgency had caused thousands of deaths and brought the country to the brink of chaos. Opposition politicians said he was really seeking to escape any democratic checks to his power. But he was soon vindicated in the eyes of most Peruvians by the capture of Shining Path’s leader.

Under international pressure to restore democracy, Mr Fujimori re-wrote the constitution and reopened the Congress. Buoyed by his twin victories over the insurgents and hyperinflation, he was overwhelmingly re-elected in 1995. However he soon began employing authoritarian methods against his democratic opponents and using government resources to support his own campaigns. In the process he eviscerated what was left of the nation’s political institutions. Vladimiro Montesinos, his shadowy spy chief, constructed an elaborate espionage and extortion network which gave Fujimoro de facto control over the armed forces, the legislature, the judiciary, the electoral authorities, and much of the mass media.

He then decided to stand for an unprecedented third successive presidential term. Opposition politicians declared the move illegal, as under the constitution he introduced in 1993 only two terms were allowed. But Fujimori argued that he was first elected under the previous constitution and thus had technically served only one term. When the constitutional court disagreed with his interpretation, he sacked several of the judges. Several election officials resigned amid charges that more than a million signatures were forged to ensure Fujimori’s registration as a candidate. Both the United States and the Organisation of American States expressed concern over irregularities in the campaign.

After a controversial election Fujimoro was declared the winner. But the opposition charged him with rigging the vote count and refused to accept the results. Violent street crashes erupted. But just when it seemed the international community was prepared to recognize the election as a fait accompli, a leaked videotape revealed the extraordinary web of corruption spun by spy chief Montesinos. Fujimoro fled to Japan in disgrace while Montesinos remains in hiding.

Alan Garcia, who had fled Peru in 1992 amidst charges of massive corruption, returned to the country. In the elections held on April 8^th this year he placed second to Alejandro Toledo. They will contest a runoff next month with a victory for Garcia by no means out of the question. For although Fujimori's free-market reforms ended hyperinflation and initially generated growth, the economy stagnated in the latter part of the 1990s. Poverty and inequality have increased of late, and many Peruvians now consider themselves worse off than they were 10 years ago under Garcia.

The shocking details of Fujimoro’s regime are just becoming clear. According to the May 3 London Times “… it is believed that before fleeing Peru late last year in disgrace, Alberto Fujimori, the former president, and his shadowy spy chief, Vladimiro Montesinos, may have looted the country of about $2 billion … If the charges are proven the two men… will have pulled off the biggest raid on a country’s coffers - bigger even than the massive thefts carried out in the Philippines by Ferdinand and Imelda Marcos… More than $250 million has been frozen in foreign bank accounts linked to the pair…”

Such have been the fruits of a decade of ‘benevolent dictatorship’ in Peru.

(An aside - a Jamaican can’t help noticing certain parallels between Alan Garcia and Michael Manley, and Alberto Fujimoro and Edward Seaga. Except of course that neither Manley or Seaga ever had to flee Jamaica in corrupt disgrace. Despite what some people might say, our political structure is a lot healthier than in many other places.)