Indigenous Woman is Unlawfully Excluded from 2023 Presidential Race
International human rights organizations have decried the electoral veto as politically motivated as Cabrera has been critical of the government, particularly on matters of corruption.
When Thelma Cabrera ran for president of Guatemala in 2019, she won 10% of the popular vote, surprising seasoned observers and ordinary citizens alike. While this was not sufficient to advance her to a second round, it was significant as the greatest share any Indigenous candidate has earned in a country of almost 50% Indigenous residents.
Cabrera is only the second Maya woman to run in Guatemala’s presidential election. The 52-year-old is running a strong, grassroots campaign following her activism on human- and land-rights issues that impact the 22 unique Indigenous groups across the country. On January 30th, 2023, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal unlawfully denied Cabrera’s candidacy alongside her running mate and ex-Human Rights Ombudsman Jordán Rodas.
“They fear her because she’s a woman, she’s Indigenous, and she has the power to win the People’s vote,” asserted Lucrecia Carillo, an advocate for women’s rights in the Huehuetenango Department.
Born in an impoverished town called El Asintal, and of the ethnic group Mam, Cabrera’s upbringing was one shared by many Indigenous people living in Guatemala’s rural communities. Her work with those that lacked opportunities, employment, and income has been compounded by the violence and systemic corruption that continues marginalizing- and pushing- these groups to migrate.
“The government here doesn’t and has never supported us. We support ourselves,” assured Carillo, a Mam woman herself.
The Supreme Electoral Tribunal rejected the presidential binomial after an accusation against Rodas surfaced that has yet to be investigated. As a vocal advocate for LGBTQ rights in Guatemala, Rodas has been persecuted and lampooned by the State during his time in the Human Rights Ombudsperson’s Office.
“They fear her because she’s a woman, she’s Indigenous, and she has the power to win the People’s vote.”
International human rights organizations have decried the electoral veto as politically motivated, as Cabrera and Rodas have both been critical of the Guatemalan government, particularly on matters of corruption.
Cabrera is an active member of the Peasant Development Committee (CODECA), where she was selected by the organization to represent their political party, Movement for the Liberation of the Peoples. Enduring numerous death threats, she toured Guatemala’s rural communities absent of bodyguards to cultivate candid relationships with prospective voters. Despite electoral inequities in the country–only 69% of Indigenous people are registered to vote, compared to 80% of Latinos–Cabrera has been consistently rated as a frontrunner by the country’s political experts. This might explain why her candidacy was a central target of the government’s increasingly authoritarian antics. Two other Indigenous candidates with less broad support are being allowed to run.
“The government here doesn’t and has never supported us. We support ourselves.”
Cabrera and Rodas threatened to file a lawsuit with the Inter-American Courts of Human Rights following the Supreme Electoral Tribunal’s decision. Discussions on this legal recourse are ongoing and can be followed here.
Following the rejection of Cabrera and Rodas, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal permitted Zury Ríos, the daughter of genocider Efrain Montt, to enter the elections. Constitutionally, presidential candidates cannot be descendants of former presidents that came to power through a coup. Montt was president of Guatemala from 1982–83 and was responsible for over 600 massacres against Indigenous communities. Montt’s efforts fit in a long arch of atrocities committed by the Guatemalan government against Indigenous people: during the country’s Civil War, which ran from 1960–66, four percent of the Indigenous population was murdered in ethnic cleansing campaigns directly carried out by the state and its sponsored groups.
Sources:
