Latin American Rulers Embrace Harsh Prisons

Mossoró prison, in the state of Rio Grande do Norte, in Brazil, is one of the five maximum security prisons in that country. Credit: Mjsp

By Humberto Márquez
CARACAS, Sep 4 2024 (IPS)

Invoking the fight against terrorists and sending those who can be charged with this crime to new maximum security prisons are increasingly emerging in the toolbox of Latin American leaders who want to show an iron fist against criminals and opponents.

Renata Segura, head of the regional programme of the Brussels-based think-tank International Crisis Group, wrote on her X-media account that “the fascination of Latin American presidents with maximum security prisons is spreading like wildfire.”

This attraction is present among presidents of opposing political persuasions, although most of them are united by the neo-populism of their policies and actions.

Venezuela is the most recent case, where president Nicolás Maduro, whose re-election in the 28 July elections sparked an outbreak of street protests, ordered two prisons to be set up as maximum security jails to hold some 2,000 protesters arrested and accused of terrorism.“The fascination of Latin American presidents with maximum security prisons is spreading like wildfire”: Renata Segura.

Argentine president Javier Milei accused opponents who recently demonstrated against him in Buenos Aires of the same offence, while Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa ordered the construction of a maximum security prison and a prison ship for criminals accused of terrorism.

The top regional reference is president Nayib Bukele of El Salvador, who under a state of emergency that has lasted more than two years has detained 80,000 people, mostly accused of terrorism as members of large criminal gangs or maras.

The Bukele government built a mega-prison, the Terrorism Containment Center (Cecot), with capacity for 40,000 inmates who are subjected to trial and detention conditions that violate human rights, according to international humanitarian organisations that observe the process.

Segura told IPS from New York that “the recent announcements of the construction of maximum security prisons are most likely inspired by the measures taken by president Bukele, who has been quite successful in reducing insecurity.”

She acknowledged that the Salvadoran ruler “has high levels of popularity, despite massive human rights violations in that country.”

Indeed, “he ended up putting two percent of El Salvador’s adult population behind bars, mostly without due process, and with serious human rights violations,” said Carolina Jiménez Sandoval, president of the non-governmental Washington Office on Latin America (Wola).

Under this state of emergency, “at least 261 people have already been killed, and we must remember that every person in state custody is the responsibility of the state,” Sandoval told IPS from Washington.

New fad, old recipe

On 21 June, Noboa started building a maximum-security prison on a 16-hectare site in the province of Santa Elena, on the Pacific coast of Ecuador, a country of 18 million people with 36 prisons. It is expected to cost US$52 million and will hold up to 800 inmates.

“Today we are marking one of the most important milestones in our fight against terrorism and the mafias that have hijacked our country’s momentum for decades,” said the president, who will seek re-election next year.

In Venezuela, while hundreds of young protesters against Maduro’s proclamation as winner were imprisoned in late July, the president ordered two prisons in the centre of the country, Tocorón and Tocuyito, to be remodelled as “maximum security prisons” to hold the new captives.

Not to be outdone, Milei announced he will sell prisons on valuable land in urban centres in Argentina, and use the money to build maximum security prisons far from the cities. In June he sent his Security minister, Patricia Bullrich, to learn about the Salvadoran experience.

“This is the way. Tough on criminals,” the minister said after the visit.

Maximum security prisons have always existed in the region, such as the Mexican Federal Rehabilitation Centre El Altiplano, in the central state of Mexico, where a group of former drug cartel leaders and serial killers are held.

Colombia has its most secure prisons in Combita (centre) and Valledupar (north), as well as maximum security wings in Bogota’s La Picota prison, where it has held guerrillas, convicted or accused terrorists, and drug cartel leaders for years.

Brazil, with 8.5 million square kilometres and 205 million people, has five maximum security prisons, in four of its 26 states and in the Federal District. Two prisoners escaped from Mossoro prison in the northeast last February, its first jailbreak since 2006.

Tragically famous are the prisons of Lurigancho, in Lima, and El Fronton Island, in the Pacific off the capital, for the massacre of hundreds of prisoners belonging to leftist guerrilla group Shining Path, following a riot in June 1986, in the context of the anti-terrorist struggle in Peru.

These maximum security prisons were shut down after the massacre, but Peru maintains the Challapalca prison, in a desolate spot in the south of the country at 4,600 metres above sea level, the highest in the world, where it holds dozens of prisoners considered highly dangerous.

Commenting on the case of El Salvador, Jiménez Sandoval observed, “does it have lower homicide levels? True. Do people feel safer? True.”

“It is also true that these punitive models based on mass arrests and human rights violations tend to have immediate effects, but it is very difficult in the medium and long term for them to continue to be useful”, she said.

“You can’t put everyone behind bars”, but also “because many of the factors that influence and cause the inclusion of young people in violence remain, such as poverty, exclusion, lack of educational and employment opportunities and life plans”, Jiménez said.

Cultivating fear

Now, the option of maximum security prisons goes beyond the fight against terrorism and reaches political activism, threatening opponents or demonstrators who could be accused of this crime, and also as a show of strength and determination to hold on to power.

“When rulers in countries that also face high rates of insecurity due to organised crime, gangs or other phenomena announce these measures, they are undoubtedly making gestures that indicate that they too are adopting a tough-on-crime strategy,” Segura said.

In Venezuela, “where repression of the opposition has grown after the elections, I think there is another goal: sending a message to those who are considering joining the protests that they will be arrested and imprisoned as if they were high risk criminals,” she added.

The Venezuelan government “is making a very intense effort to mainstream that anyone who protests or dissents from the officially announced election results is a terrorist,” lawyer Gonzalo Himiob, vice-president of Foro Penal, an organisation advocating human rights, and in particular of prisoners, for 15 years, told IPS.

“There is a deliberate trivialisation of terrorism by those in power, and a technical incorrectness, because arrested demonstrators do not fit the internationally accepted definitions of terrorist agents, links or acts,” Himiob said.

Many of those arrested were just bystanders not even demonstrating, and among the 1,500 arrested in the weeks following the 28 July election there are at least 114 teenagers, which delegitimises the terrorism charges, he adds.

There were “doubly serious events”, such as the announcement by the Prosecutor’s Office that those arrested would be categorised as terrorists, “a prefabricated catalogue that inverts the law, which states that first the facts are individualised and then the people, and not the other way around,” continued Himiob.

In short, “they are acting with what is known as criminal law of the enemy, using it not to do justice but to capitalise on power,” he said.

And, thus, to rule with the impulse of the springs of fear.