摘要：美国有线电视新闻网（CNN），2025年9月14日的分析报道，巴西前总统雅伊尔·博索纳罗本周因涉嫌策划推翻本国2022年大选结果被定罪，判处27年以上监禁。但他绝非首位陷入法律纠纷的拉美领导人。

欢迎和感谢各位朋友阅读、转发、收藏、关注和留下宝贵评论！[鼓掌][作揖]喜欢阅读英语的朋友可跳过中文，直接阅读后附英语原文参考材料。

美国有线电视新闻网插图作家家哈苏亚·拉佐制作的涉嫌贪腐的众多拉美领导人头像

一、拉美多数国家最高领导人因涉嫌贪腐受指控和被判刑的案例大幅上升

美国有线电视新闻网（CNN），2025年9月14日的分析报道，巴西前总统雅伊尔·博索纳罗本周因涉嫌策划推翻本国2022年大选结果被定罪，判处27年以上监禁。但他绝非首位陷入法律纠纷的拉美领导人。

在秘鲁，目前至少有四位前总统正在利马的巴尔巴迪略监狱服刑；而在哥伦比亚，仅在上个月，2002年至2010年期间担任总统的阿尔瓦罗·乌里韦，因被判犯有程序欺诈和篡改证人罪，被判处12年软禁（他目前正对该判决提出上诉）。

事实上，仔细观察该地区其他国家便会发现，前领导人陷入法律纠纷并非特例，而是普遍现象。除一个国家外，所有拉美国家中，至少有一位（且往往更多）的前总统正受到司法审查。

在厄瓜多尔，自1996年以来，几乎所有领导人（共八位）都曾接受执法机构调查，仅2005年至2007年任职的阿尔弗雷多·帕拉西奥是个例外。其中三人被判犯有刑事罪行，包括2007年至2017年担任总统的拉斐尔·科雷亚，他因一桩贿赂案被判刑，目前在比利时获得政治庇护。秘鲁的情况与此类似：自千禧年以来，至少有七位总统因涉嫌腐败或侵犯人权指控而面临审判或法律质疑（另有一位总统在警方逮捕时自杀身亡）。只有弗朗西斯科·萨加斯提和巴伦廷·帕尼亚瓜是其中的例外。

紧随其后的是萨尔瓦多、墨西哥、危地马拉和阿根廷，这四个国家各有五位前总统正在面临或曾面临刑事调查。在阿根廷，有两位前总统被定罪，包括克里斯蒂娜·费尔南德斯·德基什内尔她于2022年因欺诈性管理罪被判有罪，目前处于软禁状态，并被禁止参选；而在危地马拉，已有三位前总统被定罪。

接下来是哥斯达黎加、巴西、巴拉圭和玻利维亚，这四个国家各有四位前领导人曾接受调查，且每个国家至少有两人被定罪。在该地区的统计中，巴拿马和洪都拉斯各有三起针对前领导人的调查，且至少各有一人被定罪；尼加拉瓜、多米尼加共和国、海地、哥伦比亚、委内瑞拉和智利则均至少有一起针对前领导人的调查。

2025年3月1日，乌拉圭即将卸任的总统普将总统绶带授予接待他的亚曼杜·奥尔西

二、乌拉圭最高领导人为何成能为唯一的例外？

在乌拉圭，其民主时期的历任总统中，没有一人被司法系统起诉或定罪，也没有任何针对他们的公开调查。

不仅如此，这个位于拉普拉塔河畔的小国还经常在民主质量调查中名列前茅。例如《经济学人》民主指数2024年将乌拉圭列为全球第15位，称其为拉美地区唯一的“完全民主国家”，智利以第29位紧随其后。该指数考量的因素包括选举流程、政府运作、政治参与、政治文化和公民自由等。

乌拉圭天主教大学教授、政治学博士安赫尔·阿雷利亚诺表示，乌拉圭之所以能处于这一独特地位，部分原因在于他所说的“尊重公共资源的政治文化”。

阿雷利亚诺表示：“在乌拉圭，高级官员使用私人汽车、居住在自己常居的家中是很正常的事。他们没有太多特殊待遇，尤其是与其他拉美国家相比；尽管他们薪资较高，但在行事上保持着一定的节俭作风。”

阿雷利亚诺指出：“例如，部长从一个办公室到另一个办公室时步行穿过大街、自己开车，或者议员自己开车去议会，这些都是很常见的情况。他们没有专职司机、专属秘书或直升机，而这些在邻国阿根廷却是普遍存在的。乌拉圭领导人之所以没有这类特权，部分原因在于国家规模、经济状况，当然，还有其政治文化。”

与之形成鲜明对比的是秘鲁：该国被普遍认为机构能力极弱，在《经济学人》民主指数中排名第78位。

2025年3月20日，秘鲁前总统佩德罗·卡斯蒂略抵达巴尔巴迪略监狱的法庭接受审判

三、拉美国家的制度是领导人涉嫌贪腐的罪魁祸首吗？

那么，除乌拉圭外，为何那么多的拉美国家领导人如此容易陷入涉嫌贪腐的案件呢？

专家们通常指出两个相关问题：一是官员中普遍存在的以贿赂和挪用公款为典型特征腐败，二是公众对机构缺乏信任。

根据透明国际2024年的报告，美洲地区在“透明指数”（100分代表高度透明，0分代表极度腐败）中的平均得分为42分。这一分数比欧盟低22分，仅比中东和北非地区高3分。

阿雷利亚诺将腐败与另一种现象联系起来：将权力集中在单一个人手中的总统制。

他表示：“纵观拉美地区，几乎没有哪个国家未受到腐败丑闻的波及，而其中许多案件都导致该国最高政治领导人被起诉。这是因为拉美地区继承了一种极强的总统制文化，总统在国家中扮演核心角色；而在欧洲民主国家，总统的权力会受到议会的制约。总统权力的集中，也是这一现象的部分原因。”

巴西民众要求惩处前总统博索纳罗

四、是腐败加剧了，还是调查能力提升了？

腐败并非前领导人面临的唯一指控。例如，玻利维亚前总统埃沃·莫拉莱斯去年因涉嫌与未成年人有染，被指控犯有人口贩运罪，但他坚称这些指控带有政治动机。

然而，在所有案件中，腐败案件占比极高，且数量似乎还在不断增加。拉美司法程序与政治领域专家曼努埃尔·巴兰在2018年的一篇论文中指出：“自20世纪80年代民主化以来，拉美地区起诉前行政首脑的趋势不断增强”。

这就引出了一个问题：腐败真的在加剧吗？还是说，在民主时代，随着社会透明度提高，当局的调查能力也在提升？

阿根廷布宜诺斯艾利斯托尔夸托·迪泰拉大学政治学与国际关系系主任卡塔利娜·斯穆洛维茨指出，回答这一问题的难点之一在于，腐败数据往往基于民众的主观认知。

斯穆洛维茨表示：“几年前，腐败本身并未成为公众关注的焦点，因此很难判断这一现象是否真的在加剧。”她表示：“一项调查可能只是简单地问‘你认为本国存在很多腐败政客吗？’。因此，根据这类调查，有些国家的腐败率看似很低，但并非因为腐败不存在，而是因为民众不认为这是个问题。”

依赖“法律战”，即通过提出无根据的指控来压制对手。斯穆洛维茨表示：“这并不是说腐败不存在，或者不应该受到惩罚，而是我们不能忽视一个事实。投诉也被用来压制政治对手。”

把权力关进制度的笼子

五、拉美国家领导人涉嫌贪腐并被判刑对全球防腐反腐有哪些借鉴意义？

拉美地区领导人频繁涉嫌陷入贪腐并被判刑与乌拉圭领导人“零起诉”的鲜明对比，及其反贪腐实践，为全球其他国家的防腐反腐斗争提供了以下多维度经验教育：

一是权力制约是防腐的核心。拉美多数国家的总统在国家治理中占据核心地位、缺乏有效的机构制衡机制，成为贪腐滋生的重要制度漏洞。因而，无论是执行何种制度的国家，均需强化立法、司法对行政权力的监督，划定对总统职权的制约边界和赋予司法机构审查行政行为的独立权限，以从源头预防和事后严惩震慑两个维度减少“权力寻租”。

二是廉洁政治文化需长期培育。乌拉圭的例外性源于其“尊重公共资源的政治文化”：官员无专职司机、直升机等特权，且薪资高且透明。这说明防腐不能仅靠制度约束，还需构建全民认同的廉洁文化。全球各国可借鉴乌拉圭及新加坡等国的经验，通过规范官员待遇，减少非必要特权、公开公职人员财产与公务支出、加强廉洁教育，让“敬畏公共资源”成为普遍共识，而非单纯依赖事后惩处。

三是司法独立与能力建设需同步。反腐需以“司法独立”为前提，同时强化调查能力。既要通过法律保障司法机构不受政治干预，如建立法官终身追责与职业保障制度；也要提升司法系统的专业能力，如配备贪腐案件侦查技术、完善证据链规则，避免“调查无力”或“选择性反腐”，以维护司法公信力。

四是公众参与和透明是反腐的有效利器。拉美早期腐败未受关注，部分源于公众认知不足，如阿根廷专家提及“民众不认为腐败是问题”；而近年来反腐案件的增加，与社会透明度提升、公众监督意识觉醒密切相关。这表明反腐需激活“社会监督”的力量。各国应推动公共资金的使用和项目招标流程等政务信息公开，以保障媒体与公民社会的监督权利，通过民意调查、举报平台等渠道让腐败“无处遁形”，同时通过宣传扭转“腐败容忍”心态，形成“全民反腐”的社会氛围。

拉美领导人涉嫌贪腐案近年来的增多证明：全球防腐反腐不是单一的“严惩”问题，而是需通过“加强监督、文化培育、司法独立、公众参与”的综合施策，才能实现从“事后追责”到“源头防腐”的跨越。

Why do so many Latin American leaders have legal troubles? By Sofía Benavides on CNN. September 14, 2025.

Brazil’s former President Jair Bolsonaro – who was this week convicted of plotting to overturn his country’s 2022 election and sentenced to more than 27 years in jail – is far from being the first Latin American leader to run into legal trouble.

In Peru, no fewer than four former presidents are currently serving time in Lima’s Barbadillo prison, while in Colombia just last month Álvaro Uribe, president from 2002 to 2010, was sentenced to 12 years of house arrest after being found guilty of procedural fraud and witness tampering (a verdict he is currently appealing).

Indeed, look closely at the rest of the region and it’s clear that legal trouble for former leaders is not the exception but the rule. In every Latin American country – bar one – at least one former president (and often more) is under judicial scrutiny.

In Ecuador, almost every leader since 1996 – a total of eight – has been investigated by law enforcement agencies (Alfredo Palacio, 2005-2007 is the only exception). Three of them have been found guilty of criminal offenses, including Rafael Correa, who served as president from 2007-2017 and was sentenced for a bribery case. He is currently living in political asylum in Belgium. That ties with Peru where, since the turn of the millennium, no fewer than seven presidents have been brought to trial or faced legal challenges relating to allegations of corruption or human rights abuses (while an eighth shot himself dead when police were closing in). Francisco Sagasti and Valentín Paniagua are the exceptions.

Following close behind are El Salvador, Mexico and Guatemala and Argentina, each of which has five former presidents either facing or having faced criminal probes. In Argentina, two have been convicted, including Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, who was found guilty of fraudulent administration in 2022 and is currently under house arrest and banned from running for election; while in Guatemala, three have been convicted.

Costa Rica, Brazil, Paraguay and Bolivia are next up, each with four former leaders who have faced investigation – with at least two convictions in each country. Rounding out the regional scorecard are Panama and Honduras, with three investigations and at least one conviction each; and Nicaragua, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Colombia, Venezuela and Chile – all with at least one investigation.

There is just one exception to the rule.

The exception to the rule

In Uruguay, not one single president from the country’s democratic period has been charged or convicted by the justice system, nor has any open investigation against them.

Not only that, but the small country on the Río de la Plata regularly tops democratic quality surveys – such as The Economist’s Democracy Index, which in 2024 ranked it 15th in the world and described it as the only “full democracy” in the region, followed by Chile at 29th. The index takes into account such factors as electoral processes, government functioning, political participation, political culture, and civil liberties.

Ángel Arellano, professor at the Catholic University of Uruguay and PhD in political science, says Uruguay’s unique position is partly explained by what he terms a “political culture of respect for public resources.”

“(In Uruguay) it’s normal for high officials to use their own cars and live in their usual homes. They don’t have great perks, especially compared to the rest of Latin America, and they have high salaries, yes, but a certain austerity in their practices,” Arellano said.

“For example, it’s common for a minister to walk down the avenue to go from one office to another, or to drive their own car, or for a parliamentarian to drive to parliament. No chauffeurs, secretaries, helicopters – things that do happen next door in Argentina. That infrastructure doesn’t exist in Uruguay, partly due to the country’s scale, its economy, and, again, its political culture.”

On the other end of the spectrum, Peru is widely seen as having extremely weak institutions and is ranked 78th in The Economist’s democracy index.

Is the system to blame?

So, Uruguay aside, why do Latin American leaders seem so prone to legal trouble?

Experts commonly point to two related issues: widespread corruption among officials – characterized by bribery and embezzlement of public funds – and a lack of trust in institutions among the public.

According to the latest 2024 Transparency International report, the Americas average 42 out of 100 points on a scale where 100 is very transparent and zero is very corrupt. This puts the region 22 points below the European Union and only three points above the Middle East and North Africa.

Arellano links corruption to another phenomenon: presidential systems that concentrate power in the hands of a single individual.

“If you look at the map, there’s hardly a country that hasn’t been touched by a corruption scandal, and many of those cases resulted in the prosecution of the country’s top political leader,” he said.

“That’s because Latin America has inherited a very strong presidentialist culture, where the president plays a central role in the state, unlike European democracies where the president is constrained by parliament. That concentration of power in the president also explains part of the phenomenon.”

Is corruption getting worse or are investigations getting better?

Corruption is not the only charge former leaders stand accused of. Bolivia’s ex-President Evo Morales, for example, was charged last year with human trafficking after allegedly having a relationship with a minor – allegations he insists are politically motivated.

However, corruption does account for a large – and seemingly growing – number of cases.

Manuel Balán, an academic and specialist in judicial processes and politics in Latin America, found in a 2018 paper that there had been a “growing trend toward the prosecution of former heads of the executive in Latin America since the democratization of the 1980s.”

That raises the question: is corruption really on the rise? Or, as societies become more transparent in the democratic era, are authorities simply getting better at investigating it?

Part of the problem in answering this question is that corruption statistics are often based on people’s perception, as Catalina Smulovitz, director of Political Science and International Relations at the Universidad Torcuato Di Tella in Buenos Aires, Argentina, points out.

“A few years ago, corruption as such was not a matter of public attention, so it’s hard to determine if the phenomenon has grown or not,” Smulovitz said.

“A study might simply say, ‘Do you think there are many corrupt politicians in your country?’,” she told CNN, “So according to these studies, there are countries with very low corruption rates, but not because it doesn’t exist, but because people don’t see it as a problem.”

There’s another factor to consider too: the increasing reliance on “lawfare” by political rivals who try to silence their opponents by leveling baseless allegations against them.

“It’s not that corruption doesn’t exist or shouldn’t be punished, but you can’t ignore the fact that complaints are also used to silence political opponents,” Smulovitz said.

Still, she also cautions that it has become common for public officials to try to avoid scrutiny by claiming lawfare is being used against them – and that this could lead to a boy-who-cried-wolf situation by undermining trust in the legal system

“If every time there’s oversight someone cries lawfare, then all forms of oversight could be seen as irregular or unjustified,” she said.

In such a scenario, Latin American leaders might run into fewer legal problems, but it would hardly be a healthy development for the countries themselves.

As Arellano noted, “oversight of public resources is part of the design of Western liberal democracy.”

来源：读行品世事一点号