Cuenca High Life logo

Cuenca News

‘Crusade for National Security’ underway as army personnel join police in anti-crime effort

New law enforcement measures announced last week by President Lenin Moreno went into effect on Monday. Called the “Great Crusade for National Security,” the plan involves the assignment of army personnel to law enforcement activities and increasing the number of police on the streets and highways.

Police are targeting high-crime areas around the country. (El Mercurio)

The Interior Ministry, which is responsible for law enforcement, says that the plan is being implemented first in larger cities and will expand to smaller towns and rural areas during the month of September. According the National Police office, emphasis is being placed on confiscating illegal weapons and focusing police personnel on high-crime areas. A National Police bulletin said that increased surveillance is being applied to suspected organized crime groups, particularly in coastal areas.

In addition to law enforcement, the Interior Ministry is conducting workshops with prosecutors and judges to stiffen penalties for those convicted of crimes. According to a statement from the ministry press office, “too many serious criminals are being put back on the streets too soon, serving minimal time in jail or prison.” The statement cited a Quito case in which a home burglar was arrested seven times, serving less than a month in captivity for all his crimes.

The new anti-crime measures follow mid-year statistics showing an increase of crime nationwide with Guayaquil and Quito showing double-digit increases in murders and violent assaults.

In Cuenca, where the overall crime rate has remained steady and has dropped in murders and assaults, police supervisor Alexandra Valdiviez says she intends to assign more uniformed officers to high-crime areas as well as reinforce police presence around schools and universities. She said her office is increasing efforts to reduce home burglaries and vehicle theft as well as monitoring incoming foreign residents for criminal activity.

Valdiviez said that army personnel will take over most highway vehicle checks for firearms, freeing up police for street duty.

32 thoughts on “‘Crusade for National Security’ underway as army personnel join police in anti-crime effort

  1. If Correa had put military troops on the streets, CNN would be reporting it as proof of a dictatorship.

      1. We all know that whenever you are asked for examples of Correa’s supposed authoritarianism you cannot provide any.

        1. The main issue here is that you always stick up for leaders that are authoritarians and you appear like you fall into that spectrum so it might be difficult for you to recognize authoritarianism

          1. I’ve never stuck up for any authoritarian and you’ve never cited an example of where Correa was being authoritarian. This was another opportunity that you chose to ignore.

      2. ES? I am not Jason. As I have stated often, I think Correa should have faded into the history books after his departure from the presidency, and waited for his statue and pigeons while enjoying the lecture circuit.

        But what on earth does your reply to Jason have to do with using military for police work?!! A military is carefully trained to kill enemies of the State. They have no training or attitude consistent with citizen safety. The two have nothing similar except uniforms. If there are not enough policemen and expenditure is an issue, retrain sufficient military.

        Moreno is an ass. Using military for police work empowers them. He is aping Maduro. Look to your property values.

        1. Her reply, like all her replies, has nothing to do with the comment she’s replying to. By replying to her reply with direct questions in an attempt to get the conversation back on track, you have virtually guaranteed that she will not reply.

            1. “Anti US dig”…. you nailed it! But, you forgot to mention that much of what he puts forward as “fact” is fabricated and inaccurate. I nailed him on two issues this week alone…. and when you point out the “oversight” or “misinterpretation”…. he changes the subject and presses on with whatever pops into his mind next…. often totally unrelated to the topic.

        2. If you are talking about the Military in the U.S…… you need to inform yourself on the use, the mission, and the chain of command, of the National Guard…. which by all considerations, is part of “the Military”.

    1. 1. I doubt if CNN would report on much of anything about the tiny South American country of Ecuador (Assange holing up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London being a totally different matter). 2. If by some stretch of the imagination CNN did report on anything Ecuadorian, no one would see it, since their viewership is so low. If you take away all the incidental viewers in airports, their abysmally low viewership numbers would be cut in half.

      “Thems just the facts”. CNN ratings are plummeting… and the only thing helping them over the summer, is the Democrat debates

      1. CNN has often reported on the goings on here in Ecuador, mostly parroting right-wing tropes from the likes of Andres Oppenheimer. Sounds like you get most of your news from Trump’s Twitter feed.

          1. But you have time to reply to every single comment with absolutely nothing.

            Your surrender is duly noted.

          2. LOL, I love your reply. I wish I would have thought of that to many of JF’s absurd comments and there are soooo many of them. Thank you for that. you made my day

  2. Posse Comitatus, June 18, 1878. Signed by Pres. Rutherford B. Hayes. Ecuador should heed this U.S. law.

    1. And why is that? You should first check on the history of the Posse Comitatus law of 140 years ago and you would conclude that it has no place in Ecuador today. It is quite presumptuous gringo thinking that any law or practice in the U.S. should be implemented in another country, in another time, in very different circumstances. If you don’t like the added security for whatever reason I suggest you pack your bags and get yourself back to Trumplandia.

      WIKIPEDIA: “The Posse Comitatus Act (1878)prohibited use of the U.S. Army to aid civil officials in enforcing the law or suppressing civil disorder unless expressly ordered to do so by the president. Southern Democratic members of the House who resented widespread use of federal troops during Reconstruction introduced the law.”

      The reason the former Confederate rebels did not want Union troops to be used was simply so they could more easily continue to violate the civil rights of blacks and also engage in a crusade of murder and cruelty against the newly liberated former slaves

        1. Dopey reply? You think that FACTS and HISTORY is dopey? You must be a trump acolyte who denies logic and historical facts. If anyone here is a troll it is you with your idiotic postings that demonstrate you are ignorant about what you post.

          1. Jose. while Hiram’s wording was very ill-chosen and walked right into the world’s current disgust with Americans setting up the US as the epitome of good law, good law is good law…no matter where it comes from.

            This is almost a good law. “Almost” because, to my mind, I can think of NO circumstances where a president should be allowed to circumvent the basic rule. In fact, that possible presidential circumvention is the FIRST reason I have ever heard of that logically justifies arming the electorate to the hilt.

            IMHO, a military serves the entire electorate and should never be used to subjugate it or a part of it.

            1. I appreciate your observations. However, I would ask you consider that the role of the military in most latin american countries is not that of the U.S. military as they really have not much use in terms of engaging in wars against other countries or invasions or occupations in the style of the “colossus to the north” as is well documented. The army in ecuador has frequently been used in pursuit of drug gangs, “terrorists” such as the FARC along the Colombia border, natural disasters and similar situations. The army in Ecuador is more like the National Guard’s role to which the Posee Comitatus law does not apply. Since the military receives significant funding, it makes no sense to keep them in their barracks when they can be used to increase the effort to curb crime.

  3. Does the Ecuadoran constitution have anything that would mandate that the police/military must have some basis before they are allowed to search a vehicle for firearms? Then if they find an illegal firearm they must explain why they found the search necessary. Once it is found necessary then they may prosecute for possessing an illegal firearm (if in fact it is illegal).

    1. From International Living: In Ecuador, it’s illegal for private individuals to import a firearm from the United States. Private possession of a fully automatic weapon is prohibited. So is carrying a handgun under most circumstances. Semi-automatic weapons are restricted, while it is illegal to own weapons with a caliber of more than nine millimeters. Other weapons, such as revolvers with a caliber of less than 0.38 inches, are tightly restricted.

      Only licensed gun owners may possess a firearm. To buy a gun, you must apply for an Ecuadorian gun owner’s license, which means you must provide a genuine reason for wanting to have a firearm. Examples include hunting, target shooting, gun collecting, or protection. The process also requires you to undergo an extensive background check that evaluates criminal and mental-health records. Applicants must be at least 18 years old. You must also be a legal resident of Ecuador.

      A Word of Warning…
      If you want to bring a gun to your new host country (or buy one when you arrive) for self-defense, you should be aware of a critical legal difference between the U.S. and many Latin American countries.

      In the U.S. you are considered innocent until proven guilty if you shoot in self-defense; that won’t likely be the case in Latin America. There you are liable to face jail time if you shoot someone, regardless of your motive (self-defense or otherwise). In fact, you could end up facing jail time even before the case is heard in court.

      Once granted a license, you are allowed to own one gun for hunting or sporting purposes, and one more for self-defense. The license must be renewed every year to possess firearms and every two years to carry guns.

      1. Not much comfort in that, Jose. No better than thinking mass murders can be reduced by instituting background checks AFTER a country has been flooded with 100s of millions of firearms. A waste of time. Any weapon designed to kill people only, should be allocated and registered to people who might need that weapon in their job, ie police and bank guards…not guards of grocery and variety stores. Other gun licensing can be permitted only if the weapon is kept at a registered gun club and never leaves it (unless to be sent directly to another gun club). Why on earth would a normal human being want a weapon designed to kill another human being? One-shot rifles can be licensed for hunting after an extensive training course by the police.

        Ecuadorian gun laws, reflecting a cultural norm, was one to the reasons was attractive to me.It wasn’t the lack of guns, it was the attitude. It reflects a society that does not see anything admirable or courageous in having the power to kill LARGE numbers of people in milliseconds…(or geese, deer or ducks for that matter).

        Funnily enough, there is so little data where you would think there would loads of it. Are mass murders a reflection of a specific culture, or merely the ready access to mass-murdering weaponry? If the latter is the case, then a large part of the solution is to criminalize mass murdering weaponry. If the former is the case, the mass-murderers will simply move to homemade bombs or arson or the like.

        1. I could not agree more that the culture of guns in the u.s. is indicative of a sick society and all efforts should be made and laws passed to control the madness. I still hold to the “well regulated militia” words of the much cited Second Amendment and would prefer to strictly interpret those words. If gun nuts want to use weapons of war I suggest they join the Army or USMC.

      1. The Ecuadorian army has been used for such purposes in the past and is well trained to deal with crime. Since Ecuador has no enemies and has not engaged in a real “war” since 1943 or so (against Peru lasting a few days) and has no plans to attack other countries or send the army to far off places, the army and navy spend a lot of time in the barracks. It is better to use their skills as a deterrent against increased crime. It is perfectly legal and necessary, it seems.

    2. The Constitution has been de facto suspended since the 2018 referendum. Since then the government has done whatever it wants under the pretense of an “extraordinary” situation. As long as they have the backing of the PSC, CREO and the media, it doesn’t matter what the Constitution says.

  4. Jason Faulkner, If Correa had put troops on the streets it WOULD have been proof of a dictatorship. But you had better hope that these troops work to stem the bleed of drug traffic and crime from entering Ecuador from the surrounding countries and places like Mexico. Otherwise, you will not be living in Shangri-La any longer.

Comments are closed.