Global Integrity Report

Ecuador Home

Facts

Timeline

Notebook

Integrity Scorecard

2008 Assessment

Ecuador: Integrity Indicators Scorecard

Ecuador: Integrity Scorecard Report > Sub-Category: Civil Society Organizations
Indicators		Score
1	Are anti-corruption/good governance CSOs legally protected?	67
2	Are good governance/anti-corruption CSOs able to operate freely?	67
3	Are civil society activists safe when working on corruption issues?	100
4	Can citizens organize into trade unions?	75

Indicator and sub-Indicator Details

Are anti-corruption/good governance CSOs legally protected?

1a: In law, citizens have a right to form civil society organizations (CSOs) focused on anti-corruption or good governance.

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: Constitución de la República del Ecuador, Art. 23, Numeral 19. Código Civil, Libro I, Título XXX Decreto Ejecutivo No. 3054

1b: In law, anti-corruption/good governance CSOs are free to accept funding from any foreign or domestic sources.

Score:

YES

Comments: Presently, all country-to-country cooperation has to be directed to the governmental Agencia de Cooperación Internacional (AGECI), which will coordinate the allocation of such funding among the CSOs registered through a recently created governmental mechanism. In the past, Cooperation Agencies of foreign countries were allowed to directly finance initiatives of Ecuadorian CSOs.

References: Decreto Ejecutivo No. 3054 Decreto Ejecutivo No. 982

1c: In law, anti-corruption/good governance CSOs are required to disclose their sources of funding.

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: Decreto Ejecutivo No. 982, Art. 9

Are good governance/anti-corruption CSOs able to operate freely?

2a: In practice, the government does not create barriers to the organization of new anti-corruption/good governance CSOs.

Score:

100

Comments: Recently, the Executive Branch has issued several regulative decrees, determining the specific legal framework applicable to all CSOs. One of the elements that these regulations incorporate is the capacity of the government to determine, in a rather discretional fashion, if an organization and its activities are contrary to the interests of the state. Through this broad declaration, the government reserves the ability to select the organizations that can receive a legal authorization to operate, (there is the risk that these will be limited to those aligned to their interests) and closing the opportunity of CSOs to be independent, and when necessary, confrontational to the governmental activity.

The possibility of receiving international funding has been jeopardized by these recent regulations, since the government has reserved the right to concentrate all incoming international funding into the AGECI, which then determines which organizations should receive the available funding.

References: Horacio Belletini, Executive Director, Grupo Faro, Sept. 12, 2008, Telephonic interview

Peer Review Comments: In practice, Agencia Ecuatoriana de Cooperación Internacional (AGECI) allocates the scarce funds available for this activity; and, if, by chance, the government considers a CSO a threat to their perceived mismanagement of public resources (low quality of public expenditures through emergency decrees, for example) this particular CSO will not receive any money at all. Also, the formal steps to gain operational status as a CSO, in this case, are considerably harder to accomplish.

2b: In practice, anti-corruption/good governance CSOs actively engage in the political and policymaking process.

Score:

100

Comments:

References: La Corrupción en el Ecuador, Dora de Ampuero, Instituto Ecuatoriano de Economía Política, [ LINK ]

Auditoria de la Democracia, CEDATOS Universidad de Vanderbilt [ LINK ]

Peer Review Comments: Mr. Rafael Correa, the President of Ecuador, runs the show all the way down from the Executive Branch to the National Assembly, which is now in charge of legislation. Changes to anti-corruption laws that could harm his political future (in the 2009 elections , for example, where he will run for another term) are not allowed.

2c: In practice, no anti-corruption/good governance CSOs have been shut down by the government for their work on corruption-related issues during the study period.

Score:

YES

$Scoring Criteria :: YES: A YES score is earned if there were no CSOs shut down by the government or forced to cease operations because of their work on corruption-related issues during the study period. YES is a positive score. NO: A NO score is earned if any CSO has been effectively shut down by the government or forced to cease operations because of its work on corruption-related issues during the study period. The causal relationship between the cessation of operations and the CSO\'s work may not be explicit, however the burden of proof here is low. If it seems likely that the CSO was forced to cease operations due to its work, then the indicator is scored as a NO. Corruption is defined broadly to include any abuses of power, not just the passing of bribes.$

Comments:

References: La Corrupción en el Ecuador, Dora de Ampuero, Instituto Ecuatoriano de Economía Política, [ LINK ]

Auditoria de la Democracia, CEDATOS Universidad de Vanderbilt [ LINK ]

Are civil society activists safe when working on corruption issues?

3a: In practice, in the past year, no civil society activists working on corruption issues have been imprisoned.

Score:

YES

$Scoring Criteria :: YES: A YES score is earned if there were no CSO activists imprisoned because of their work covering corruption. YES is a positive score. NO: A NO score is earned if any activist was jailed in relation to work covering corruption. The causal relationship between the official charges and the person\'s work may not be explicit, however the burden of proof here is low. If it seems likely that the person was imprisoned due to his or her work, then the indicator is scored as a NO. Corruption is defined broadly to include any abuses of power, not just the passing of bribes.$

Comments:

References: La Corrupción en el Ecuador, Dora de Ampuero, Instituto Ecuatoriano de Economía Política, [ LINK ]

Auditoria de la Democracia, CEDATOS Universidad de Vanderbilt [ LINK ]

3b: In practice, in the past year, no civil society activists working on corruption issues have been physically harmed.

Score:

YES

$Scoring Criteria :: YES: A YES score is earned if there were no documented cases of CSO activists covering corruption being assaulted in the specific study period. A YES score can be earned if there was an attack but it was clearly unrelated to the activist\'s work. YES is a positive score. NO: A NO score is earned if there were any documented cases during the study period of assault to an activist who covers corruption. Corruption is defined broadly to include any abuses of power, not just the passing of bribes.$

Comments:

References: La Corrupción en el Ecuador, Dora de Ampuero, Instituto Ecuatoriano de Economía Política, [ LINK ]

Auditoria de la Democracia, CEDATOS Universidad de Vanderbilt [ LINK ]

3c: In practice, in the past year, no civil society activists working on corruption issues have been killed.

Score:

YES

$Scoring Criteria :: YES: A YES score is earned if there were no documented cases of CSO activists being killed because of their work covering corruption in the specific study period. YES is a positive score. NO: A NO score is earned if there were any documented cases during the study period where a person was killed related to a corruption trial, scandal or investigation. The relationship between a mysterious death and an individual\'s history may not be clear, however the burden of proof here is low. If it is reasonable that a person was killed in relation to his or her work on corruption issues, then the indicator is scored as a NO. Corruption is defined broadly to include any abuses of power, not just the passing of bribes.$

Comments:

References: La Corrupción en el Ecuador, Dora de Ampuero, Instituto Ecuatoriano de Economía Política, [ LINK ]

Auditoria de la Democracia, CEDATOS Universidad de Vanderbilt [ LINK ]

Can citizens organize into trade unions?

4a: In law, citizens have a right to organize into trade unions.

Score:

YES

Comments:

References: Código del Trabajo Titulo V de las Asociaciones de Trabajadores y de los Conflictos Colectivos Capítulo I de las Asociaciones de Trabajadores

Peer Review Comments: In the case of the public sector, trade unions therein have been instituted by public sector employees (with relevant legislation) and, in most cases, have resulted in the creation of abusive power groups who greatly contribute to the squandering of public resources. There is no labor flexibility in Ecuador. There is even less of it in the public sector where employees' labor unions are excessively abusive in nature; for example, establishing minimum wages for the sectors that are involved, accompanied by very difficult entry/exit procedures.

These public sector trade unions should be banned altogether. Their existence exacerbates social tensions in the country, contribute to the worsening of the country's already unequal income distribution, and contributes to corruption levels due to their influence on management (e.g., public sector enterprises).

4b: In practice, citizens are able to organize into trade unions.

Score:

100

Comments:

References: Informe Anual sobre las violaciones de los Derechos sindicales Ecuador, 2007, Confederación Sindical Internacional [ LINK ]

Informe de situación sindical en Ecuador - 2007, Human Rights Watch [ LINK ]

Sindicalismo ecuatoriano atrapado en un laberinto, Diario Hoy, 21/Noviembre/2004, [ LINK ]

Peer Review Comments: Trade unions in the private sector are difficult to organize because labor laws in the country excessively favor the worker. There is no labor flexibility, which has worsened the unemployment situation in the country. Meanwhile, in the public sector, labor unions have existed in every scope of public life for years. Every year these unions, together with management, review and implement another so-called collective labor agreement which is abusive and therefore corrupt since it deals with the allocation of scarce public resources that could best be used for health & education.