![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
In order to explain non-citizen enfranchisement in Latin America, this article takes into account three dimensions: domestic (citizenship tradition, immigration levels, internal politics), global (international and bilateral agreements, human rights discourse) and regional (common markets, diffusion, geopolitics). The article identifies two main modalities: from the early twentieth century to the 1980s, when democracy was not a necessary condition and when national factors prevailed. Starting in the 1990s, democratization in Latin America has brought a new wave of non-citizen enfranchisement, this time with more influence of global and regional factors and, in various cases, in connection with external voting rights.
Keywords:
Acknowledgement
I would like to thank James McCann for his insightful comments and suggestions.
Notes on contributor
Cristina Escobar has a Ph.D. in Sociology. She has taught at Temple University, Franklin and Marshall College, West Chester University and Rutgers University-Camden. She worked as a research associate at the Center for Migration and Development at Princeton University. She has done research on migration and citizenship, transnational immigrant organizations, and migrants' political participation. Among her publications are “Dual Citizenship and Extraterritorial Political Rights in Latin America”, Latin American Research Review, 42, no. 3 (2007): 43–75, and “Transnational Participation in Colombian Elections: Assessing the Impact of Reception Site” (with Renelinda Arana and James McCann), Migration Studies, January 8 (2014).
Notes
1. Calderón Chelius, Votar en la Distancia; Lafleur, Transnational Politics and the State; Escobar, “Extraterritorial Political Rights.”
2. An exception is Emmerich, El Sufragio Transnacional.
3. I use the terms of Ernest, Old Nations, 257.
4. See discussion of this literature in Ibid., 40–3; Bauböck, “Expansive Citizenship,” 765; Pedroza, “Extensiones del Derecho,” 9–10.
5. According to Raskin, “Legal Aliens, Local Citizens,” 1415–6.
6. Massey et al., Worlds in Motion, 197–8; Pellegrino, “Trends in International Migration,” 12–5.
7. Castles and Davidson, Citizenship and Migration, 85; Martínez Sospedra, “Doscientos Años Después,” 476.
8. Ernest, Old Nations, 96; Ernest, “The Enfranchisement of Resident Aliens”.
9. The Cadiz Constitution is the first constitution enacted by a sovereign assembly that was expected to rule in both Spain and Spanish America. This document defines as Spanish – the nation – all free men born in the territory, naturalized foreigners, long-time residents, and emancipated men. However, this latter category of Afro-descendants, as well as domestic servants and women, were not included as citizens and therefore could not vote (Rieu-Millán, Los Diputados Americanos, 152–4; Mateos, “Los Españoles de America,” 2). Even though this constitution never really entered into effect, it influenced the constitutions in the nascent Latin American republics.
10. See Hayduk, Democracy for All, 72–3.
11. Herzog, “Communities Becoming a Nation,”, 164.
12. See Song, “Democracy and Noncitizen Voting Rights.”
13. Hayduk, Democracy for All.
14. Raskin, “Legal Aliens, Local Citizens,” 1425–30.
15. Lafleur, “The Enfranchisement of Citizens Abroad”. Escobar, “Extraterritorial Political Rights.”
16. Ernest, Old Nations, 96.
17. Raskin, “Legal Aliens, Local Citizens,” 1403–4.
18. Centeno and Ferraro, State and Nation Making, 16–7.
19. Fitzgerald and Cook-Martin, Culling the Masses, 18.
20. Ibid.
21. DiTella, “El Impacto Inmigratorio,” 214.
22. Moya, Cousins and Strangers, 489; Raskin, “Legal Aliens, Local Citizens,” 1409–17.
23. DiTella, “El Impacto Migratorio,” 214.
24. Sánchez Alonso, “Making Sense,” 616–7.
25. The family requirement was dropped in the 1967 (current) constitution.
26. Sánchez Alonso, “Making Sense.”
27. Olivar Pérez, “A Cincuenta Años;” Ramos Rodríguez, “La Inmigración.”
28. Ibid.
29. Michelena et al., Inmigración Illegal.
30. See Libertad Digital International.
31. In 2001, immigrants (1,014,317) represented 4.4% of the population. See Romero de Marcano, “Venezuela XIV Censo Nacional;” República Bolivariana de Venezuela, “Elecciones Municipales Venezuela 2013.”
32. Fisher et al., Inmigración y Emigración.
33. Martínez Pizarro et al., “Migraciones Internacionales,” 126–7; Gres Toso, De la “Regeneración del pueblo,” 139–42.
34. Obrador Castro, “Representación,” 257. Although it was discussed at the time, the women's suffrage in municipal elections was not issued as a decree until 1931 by the military dictator Carlos Ibañez del Campo and a law until 1934, during the next presidency of Alessandri.
35. Obrador Castro, “Representación,” 259.
36. A law passed in 1949 (Ley de Inscripciones Electorales No. 3341) required that the five years of residence be consecutive while another law in 1971 (Ley 17.420) reduced the age to 18 and eliminated the literacy requirement. See Jiménez Larraín, “Derechos Políticos,” 259).
37. Ibid., 135–6.
38. Valenzuela, La Constitución de 1980, 10–1.
39. República de Chile, “Artículo 14,” 7.
40. Perfil migratorio de Chile.
41. Vargas León, Las Organizaciones Políticas
42. For more on the new left in Latin America, see Levitsky and Kenneth, The Resurgence.
43. Escobar, “Extraterritorial Political Rights.”
44. In South America, Brazil and Venezuela, and in Central America, Costa Rica and Panama have not ratified the agreement by 2014 (United Nations, “International Convention).”
45. Alarcón Requejo, “Derechos Políticos,” 54–62.
46. Ministério de Justiça, “Estrangeiros. Nacionalidade e Naturalização.”
47. OIM, Panorama Migratorio, 87–93.
48. Ibid., 93–103.
49. Serrano Carrasco, “Colombia,” 117–21.
50. See more in Escobar, “Extraterritorial Political Rights,” 65.
51. República de Colombia, Gaceta Del Congreso, 18.
52. Perfil Migratorio de Colombia, “Extranjeros Residentes.”
53. By the end of 2012, there were half a million Bolivians abroad (562,461 or 5.6% of the national population). Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia, Censo Nacional, 23.
54. Lafleur, Transnational Politics and the State, 119.
55. OIM, Perfil Migratorio de Argentina, 31, 43.
56. Domenech, “La Versiónó Estatal.”
57. Sânchez Alonso, “Making Sense,” 617–8.
58. Clínica de Migración, “Informe Argentina,” 61.
59. Clavijo and Santi, “El Estado Argentino,” 191; Domenech, “La Versión Estatal,” 34–7; Clínica de Migración, “Informe Argentina,” 61; Fitzgerald and Cook-Martin, Culling the Masses, 329.
60. Modolo, “Participación Política,” 358–9.
61. Chavez Ramos, “La Experiencia Argentina,” 73.
62. Modolo, “Participación Política,” 360–1; Moreira, “Sufragio Transnacional,” 72–3.
63. Emmerich, El Sufragio Transnacional, 8–12; Modolo, “Participación Política,” 361–3; Moreira, “Sufragio Transnacional,” 70–2.
64. Moreira, “Sufragio Transnacional,” 80. Clínica de Migración, “Informe Argentina,” 78.
65. IRPIDI, “Se Lanza Campaña.”
66. Jaén, “Campaña Aquí Vivo.”
67. Calderón Chelius, “¿Oh, Qué Será,” 85–6.
68. Ministério de Justića, Decree No. 3.927/2001.
69. Fernandez et al., Brazil and International Migration, 15, 23, 24.
70. Prefeiture de São Paulo, “Conselho Participativo;” Pitts, “Aquí Vivo, Aquí Voto.”
71. “Extranjeros apáticos a las urnas.”
72. Fitzgerald and Cook-Martin, Culling the Masses, 217–36.
73. Fitzgerald, “Nationality and Migration,” 85.
74. OIM, “OIM and the Central;” OIM, “OCAM Undertakes Support.”
75. Dahl, Polyarchy.