Colombia reaches the second round of the presidential election this Sunday (19) in a climate of dirty campaign and a technical tie between the leftist Gustavo Petro, 62, and the populist Rodolfo Hernández, 77.
From the first round, in which Petro had 40% against 28% for Hernández, there was a little bit of everything. Verbal attacks with foul language, leaks of videos of meetings of the leftist’s campaign, a failed court decision for at least one debate to be held, alleged death threats against the populist and even the possibility that one of them would leave the country until the vote.
According to poll aggregator website La Silla Vacía, the difference between them is minimal: Petro has 47.2% of voting intentions, and Hernández, 46.5%. “If the difference is by a few votes, I think there could be confusion, we are very concerned and we hope that our electoral authority is responsible,” he told Sheet Senator Iván Cepeda, from the Alternative Democratic Pole, linked to Petro.
In this campaign, there were no debates between the finalists or major public events. Both candidates preferred a campaign of localized voter meetings and door-to-door visits. Petro played football, had dinner with a middle-class family and met with students, all broadcast on social media, the favorite environment for Hernández, who continued to bet on his strategy via TikTok.
One of the most repercussions before this second round was the leaking of videos of meetings of the leftist’s advisors debating how to “destroy” his opponents. Dubbed “petrovideos” by the press aligned with the current government and uribismo, the recordings reveal controversial proposals, such as visits to prisons to offer benefits to criminals and the incorporation of mayors into the campaign, something prohibited in the country and which has already caused the removal of Medellín city leader Daniel Quintero.
Petro denied that the videos were illegal and accused the government of President Iván Duque of having facilitated the leaks, saying that only the state would have resources for what it considered to be espionage.
Hernández took the opportunity to say from Miami that he had been informed of a plan by the Petro campaign to kill him. At the time, he stated that he would not return to the country until the second round, which he did not do. Earlier, the leftist had already said that he was the target of death threats — he even canceled events.
The possibility of meeting in a debate was another point of tension. After the Justice determined that at least one such event should be held, the populist said that he would only accept to meet with Petro if it was in his electoral stronghold, Bucaramanga — and only with themes chosen by him. The opponent did not accept the conditions, and one ended up blaming the other for not holding the meeting.
In an election in which the vote against the establishment was a hallmark, taking out the main parties in the country, the Liberal and the Conservative, as well as the Democratic Center, a political force commanded by former president Álvaro Uribe, the two candidates represent proposals for changes structures of the state.
If elected, Petro, a former guerrilla who switched from armed struggle to democracy, twice elected to the Senate and once to the City of Bogotá, will become Colombia’s first leftist president, with proposals to change the local economic model, giving more emphasis to agrarian production and reducing extractive actions —the country’s main export product is oil. The leftist also promises an agrarian reform based on taxing unproductive land and increasing taxes on the richest.
In the case of Hernández, a businessman who became rich in the real estate market in Bucaramanga, the city of which he was mayor, the programmatic lines are less clear. Among the proposals are greater state intervention in the economy, anti-corruption policies — which would include cash prizes for whistleblowers — a census of drug users for harm reduction programs and the creation of rural prisons in the form of work colonies, to empty the country’s crowded detention centers. His speech turned to the poorest and the “desplazados”, that is, those displaced by violence in the countryside.
Both candidates support the peace agreement signed in 2016 with the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) and want to reopen negotiations with the ELN (National Liberation Army), a guerrilla still active. Hernández and Petro also have less severe proposals to fight organized crime than previous governments. The leftist bets that the reform of the economic model will bring peace, and the populist, the reduction of poverty. Voting is not mandatory in Colombia, where 39 million people are eligible to vote. In the first round, turnout was 54%.
Although all these elements mark a historic election, the controversies ended up drawing more attention than the proposals. And, just before voting day, there was still time for one more: on Thursday (16), the website Cambio Colombia published a video from October 2021 in which Hernández is on a yacht full of women in bikinis dancing. According to the publication, the expenses of the party were paid by pharmaceutical Pfizer, “interested in expanding its business in Colombia”.
At the time, the current presidential candidate did not hold public office, and the images do not show the populist committing any illegality. But it was enough to enter the list of controversies of this election.
