¹ Economist, March 2, 2002.

² La Nación, May 7, 2002.

³ Washington Post, July 30, 2002.

⁴ Friedman, , Capitalism and Freedom (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962)Google Scholar.

⁵ Williamson, John, The Political Economy of Policy Reform (Washington, D.C.: Institute of International Economics, 1994)Google Scholar.

⁶ Kydland, Finn and Prescott, Edward, “Rules Rather than Discretion: The Inconsistency of Optimal Plans,” Journal of Political Economy 85, no. 3 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷ See Hamilton, Alexander, Jay, John, and Madison, James, The Federalist, edited, with an introduction, reader's guide, constitutional cross-reference, index, and glossary, by Carey, George W. and McClellan, James (Indianapolis, Ind.: Liberty Fund, c. 2001), 47–51.Google Scholar

⁸ North, Douglass, “Economic Performance through Time,” American Economic Review 84, no. 3 (1994)Google Scholar.

⁹ Economist, March 2, 2002.

¹⁰ Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye, “Democracy, Accountability, and Global Governance” (Paper prepared for the University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation Conference on Globalization and Governance, La Jolla, March 23–24, 2001).

¹¹ Schedler, Andreas, “Conceptualizing Accountability,” in Schedler, Andreas, Diamond, Larry, and Plattner, Marc, eds., The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies (Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1999).Google Scholar

¹² An example would be the ombuds office in many European and Latin American countries. While it may expose government wrongdoing, it is not empowered to prosecute. The same applies to several fiscal tribunals in Europe and the U.S Office of Government Ethics.

¹³ Ostrom, Elinor, Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁴ Guillermo O'Donnell, “Horizontal Accountability in New Democracies,” in Schedler, Diamond, and Plattner (fn. 11).

¹⁵ See Schedler (fn. 11), 17.

¹⁶ “Matthew McCubbins and Thomas Schwartz, “Police Patrols vs. Fire Alarms,” American Journal of Political Science 28 (February 1984)Google Scholar; Laver, Michael and Shepsle, Kenneth, “Government Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies,” in Przeworski, Adam, Stokes, Susan, and Manin, Bernard, eds., Democracy, Accountability, and Representation (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999)Google Scholar; and Shugart, Matthew, Moreno, Erika, and Crisp, Brian, “The Accountability Deficit in Latin America,” in Mainwaring, Scott and Welna, Christopher, eds., Democratic Accountability in Latin America (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003)Google Scholar.

¹⁷ John Ferejohn, “Accountability and Authority: Toward a Theory of Political Accountability,” in Przeworski, Stokes, and Manin (fn. 16).

¹⁸ Scott Mainwaring, “Introduction,” in Mainwaring and Welna (fn. 16).

¹⁹ Ibid.

²⁰ O'Donnell (fn. 14), 38–39.

²¹ Philippe Schmitter, “The Limits of Horizontal Accountability,” in Schedler, Diamond, and Platt-ner (fn. 11); Mainwaring and Welna (fn. 16); Larry Diamond, Marc Plattner, and Andreas Schedler, “Introduction,” in Schedler, Diamond, and Plattner (fn. 11).

²² In the mid-1990s, for instance, once Peruvian president Alberto Fujimori obtained a majority in Congress, he asked the legislature to approve bills restricting the prerogatives of the judiciary and the legislature itself to the advantage of the executive. More recently, Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi had the Italian parliament (where he enjoys a large majority) pass new laws making it impossible for state prosecutors to continue the trials involving him and his closest aids for alleged corruption. In both instances the initiatives were perfectly legal, but most observers saw them as severely reducing the accountability of the executive branch.

²³ The indicators to measure this concept are usually public sector performance, judicial, legal, and regulatory systems, delivery of services to the poor, empowering civil society, increasing transparency, accountability, supporting decentralization, and promoting results-oriented public sector management.

²⁴ Mehrez, Gil and Kaufmann, Daniel, “Transparency, Liberalization, and Financial Crises,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. 2286 (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1999)Google Scholar.

²⁵ Kaufmann, Daniel, Kraay, Aart, and Zoido-Lobatón, Pablo, “Governance Matters,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. 2195 (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1999)Google Scholar.

²⁶ Ritzen, Jon, Easterly, William, and Woolcock, Michael, “On ‘Good’ Politicians and ‘Bad’ Policies: Social Cohesion, Institutions, and Growth,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. 2248 (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2000)Google Scholar.

²⁷ Hellman, Joel, Jones, G., and Kaufmann, David, “Measuring Governance, Corruption, and State Capture: How Firms and Bureaucrats Shape the Business Environment in Transition Economies,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, no. 2312 (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2000)Google Scholar; Hellman, Joel and Kaufmann, David, “Confronting the Challenge of State Capture in Transition Economies,” IMF's Finance and Development 38, no. 3 (2001)Google Scholar; and Mherez and Kaufmann (fn. 24).

²⁸ Hellman and Kaufmann (fn. 27).

²⁹ Williamson, Oliver, Economic Organization: Firms, Markets and Policy Control (New York: New York University Press, 1986)Google Scholar; Olson, Mancur, The Rise and Decline of Nations (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982)Google Scholar; North, Douglass, Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁰ Stiglitz, Joseph, Globalization and Its Discontents (New York: Norton, 2002)Google Scholar

³¹ World Bank, Bureaucrats in Business (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995)Google Scholar; and idem, , World Development Report 2003 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003)Google Scholar.

³² Financial Times, August 7, 2001.

³³ In 2001 Argentina was the issuer of the largest amount of bonds among the emerging market economies. See Washington Post, August 7, 2001, E01.

³⁴ Shleifer, Andrei and Vishny, Robert, “Corruption,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 108 (August 1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Elliott, Kimberly, ed., Corruption and the Global Economy (Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics, 1997)Google Scholar; and Rose-Ackerman, Susan, Corruption and Government: Causes, Consequences and Reform (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁵ In many emerging markets reliable data on corruption are scarce, since the press is often intimidated and the courts are heavily dependent upon the executive. Argentina's press in this regard is an exception. Moreover, since Menem left power, many state prosecutors and judges, no longer fearing retaliation, felt free to investigate crimes committed during the 1990s. These two factors provide a wealth of data not readily available in other countries.

³⁶ The relevance of the Argentine case was underscored by U.S. treasury undersecretary John Taylor shortly before December 2001 in these terms: “Argentina is one of the emerging markets that most clearly embarked on [the process of] globalization and implemented the reforms that the specialists saw were necessary to obtain the benefits of an insertion into the global economy. It would be tragic, not only for Argentina, but for the whole global economy, if it were concluded that Argentina's experience was useless and did not work for Argentines or the rest of the world.” See Financial Times, August 8, 2001.

³⁷ World Bank, World Development Report 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001)Google Scholar.

³⁸ Ibid., 163–64.

³⁹ Washington Post, August 6, 2002.

⁴⁰ La Nación, October 8, 2002.

⁴¹ The countries selected adopted at least three of the five policies making up the market reform agenda: fiscal, trade, financial, state/labor market reform, and privatization. Such policies took place between 1980 and 1998. For a review of many of these countries' reforms, see World Bank (fn. 31, 1995).

⁴² Daniel Kaufmann, Aart Kraay, and Pablo Zoido-Lobatón, “Governance Matters II: Updated Indicators for 2000/01,” Policy Research Working Paper, no. 2772 (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 2002).

⁴³ Hellman, Jones, and Kaufmann (fn. 27); and Hellman and Kaufmann (fn. 27).

⁴⁴ Hellman and Kaufmann (fn. 27), 3.

⁴⁵ See fn. 29.

⁴⁶ Hellman and Kaufmann (fn. 27), 3.

⁴⁷ On the legal inconsistencies and consequence of these laws, see Gordillo, Augustín, Después de la reforma del estado (Buenos Aires: Fundación de Derecho Administrativo, 1996)Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ Saba, Roberto, “Regulatory Policy in an Unstable Legal Environment: The Case of Argentina,” in Manzetti, Luigi, ed., Regulatory Policy in Latin America: Post-Privatization Realities (Miami: North-South Center Press at the University of Miami, 2000)Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ Página 12, September 9, 1990.

⁵⁰ Natale, Alberto, Privatizaciones en privado (Buenos Aires: Planeta, 1993)Google Scholar.

⁵¹ In a recent book Rigoli contends that several senators making up the BCP were rumored to have received bribes in order to give their support for the new patent law and the transfer to the private sector of water (Aguas Argentinas), federal highways, and the oil industry (Yacimientos Petroliferos Fis-cales). Rigoli, Orlando Juan, Senado S.A.: Una maquinaria en funcionamiento (Buenos Aires: Planeta, 2000)Google Scholar.

⁵² Rubio, Delia Ferreira and Goretti, Matteo. “Executive-Legislative Relationship in Argentina: From Menem's Decretazo to a New Style?” (Paper prepared for the conference Argentina 2000, Oxford University, Oxford, May 15–17, 2000).Google Scholar

⁵³ Yet when Congress could not be bypassed through DNUs or vetoes and the fate of a bill was very much in doubt, the Peronist leadership resorted to illegal means to get things done. During the debate of the bills enlarging the Supreme Court membership and the privatization of Gas del Estado in 1992, the Radicals tried to force Menem to bargain by depriving the Chamber of Deputies of the required quorum for the vote to take place. To get around this delaying tactic, the Peronists on both occasions sent impostors to the voting session that took place in the middle of the night to take the seats of absent legislators and thereby provide the necessary quorum for Peronists to pass the bill (notwithstanding the request of Radical legislators to annul the session). See Vidal, Armando, El Congreso en la trampa: entretelonesy escdndalos de la vidaparlamentarias (Buenos Aires: Planeta, 1995)Google Scholar. In brief, these events are clear examples of an executive blatantly abusing its authority; see Ferreira Rubio and Goretti (fn. 52).

⁵⁴ Ambito Financiero, November 11, 1992.

⁵⁵ For an excellent analysis of the judiciary under Menem, see Larkins, Christopher, “The Judiciary and Delegative Democracy in Argentina,” Comparative Politics 30 (July 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁶ See Saba(fn. 48).

⁵⁷ Luis A. Peralta et al., Estado Nacional (Ministeno de Economía y Banco Nacional de la República Argentina) s/amparo, decided on December 27, 1990, in Fallos, vol. 3113:1513.

⁵⁸ Verbistky, Horacio, Robo para la corona: los frutos proibidos del árbol de la corrupción (Buenos Aires: Planeta, 1991)Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ Fallos, 1994, Cons. 24 ; and La Ley, Buenos Aires, 1994-B, 633.

⁶⁰ Clarin, May 23, 1994.

⁶¹ Author interview with former state prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo, Buenos Aires, March 20, 1996.

⁶² Larkins(fn.55).

⁶³ Verbistky, Horacio, Hacer la Corte: la construcción de un poder absoluto sin justicia ni control (Buenos Aires: Planeta, 1993)Google Scholar.

⁶⁴ Verbitsky (fn.58), 91.

⁶⁵ Larkins (fn. 55).

⁶⁶ Revista Argentina del Régimen de la Administración Pública (Buenos Aires : December 1999).

⁶⁷ Author interviews with Professors Roberto de Michele and Roberto Saba, University of Buenos Aires Law School, Buenos Aires, May 1994.

⁶⁸ Verbitsky(fn. 58).

⁶⁹ Author interviews with former staffers of the SIGEP, Buenos Aires, May 1994.

⁷⁰ Verbitsky (fn.58).

⁷¹ Ibid.

⁷² Ibid.

⁷³ Cherashny, Guillermo, Menem, Yabran, Cavallo: final abierto (Buenos Aires: Solaris, 1997)Google Scholar.

⁷⁴ Author interviews with World Bank staffers, Washington, D.C., April 1998.

⁷⁵ See Clarín, August 8, 2001; La Nación, September 11, 2001. The Correo Argentino by itself owed the federal government $206 million in back fees, whereas the Aeropuertos Argentina 200 was seeking a 60 percent reduction of its annual fee worth $171 million.

⁷⁶ See La Nación, September 21, 2001, and October 26, 2001. In addition to mismanaging aspects of the telephone privatization, Alsogaray could not account for assets of $2.5 million in excess of her sworn declaration; La Nación, June 6, 2002.

⁷⁷ La Nación, March 21, 2002.

⁷⁸ Allegedly, Menem approved the smuggling of Argentine military equipment to Ecuador and Croatia between 1991 and 1995. According to the state prosecutors, only $80 million of the $120 million netted in this illegal transaction could be accounted for, which raised suspicions that the rest went for bribes to government officials. Federal investigators found two different accounts in Switzerland linked to Menem, something that the former president had always denied. As the inquiry expanded, state prosecutors found that Menem possessed at least one million dollars in excess of his own sworn declaration while in office, and they asked him to explain how he had obtained those assets; La Nación, October 5, 2001. And he was recently accused by an Iranian defector of having received $10 million (deposited in Switzerland) from the Iranian government to cover up a 1994 terrorist attack against an Argentine Jewish association in Buenos Aires; New York Times, July 21, 2002.

⁷⁹ Página 12 July 8, 2001.

⁸⁰ Gerchunoff, Pablo and Cánovas, Guillermo, “Privatización en un contexto de emergencia económica,” Desarrollo Económico 34 (January-March 1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Azpiazu, Daniel, “La elite empresaria y el ciclo económico: cartelización del capital, inserción structural y beneficios extraordinarios,” in Notcheff, Hugo, ed., La Económia argentina a fin del siglo: fragmentación presente y desarrollo ausente (Buenos Aires: Eudeba/Flaco, 1998)Google Scholar.

⁸¹ Majul, Luis, Los Dueños de la Argentina: la cara oculta de los negocios (Buenos Aires: Planeta, 1993)Google Scholar and idem, , Los Dueños de la Argentina II: los secretos del verdadero poder (Buenos Aires: Planeta, 1994)Google Scholar.

⁸² Guislain, Pierre, The Privatization Challenge: A Strategic, Legal, and Institutional Analysis of International Experience (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁸³ Urbiztondo, Santiago, Artana, Daniel, and Navajas, Fernando, “La Autonomia de los Entes Reguladores Argentinos,” Desarrollo Económico 38 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁸⁴ Chiasari, Omar, Estache, Antonio, and Romero, Carlos, “Winners and Losers from the Privatization and Regulation of Utilities: Lessons from a General Equilibrium Model of Argentina,” World Bank Economic Review 13, no. 2 (1999)Google Scholar; Petrazzini, Ben, “Telephone Privatization in a Hurry,” in Ramamurti, Ravi, ed., Privatizing Monopolies: Lessons from the Telecommunications and Transport Sectors in Latin America (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995)Google Scholar.

⁸⁵ Gerchunoff, Pablo and Coloma, German, “Privatization in Argentina,” in Sánchez, Manuel and Corona, Rossana, eds., Privatization in Latin America (Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank, 1993)Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ Petrecolla, Alberto, Porto, Alberto, Gerchunoff, Pablo, and Cánovas, Guillermo, “Privatization in Argentina,” Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 33 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁸⁷ See Chiasari, Estache, and Romero (fn. 84).

⁸⁸ In 1997 the Spanish electricity group ENDESA acquired the Chilean company controlling EDESUR, one of the two electricity distributors of Buenos Aires. However, ENDESA was also the majority shareholder of the other Buenos Aires distributor, EDENOR. Despite the monopoly so created, ENRE decided not to intervene, allegedly due to intense lobbying on the part of ENDESA. Author interview with Car-los Winograd, Secretary of the Defensa de la Competencia, Buenos Aires, March 2001.

⁸⁹ Clarín, April 22, 1998.

⁹⁰ La Nación, July 8, 2002, August 15, 2002.

⁹¹ Gibson, Edward and Calvo, Ernesto, “Federalism and Low-Maintenance Constituencies: Territorial Dimensions of Economic Reform in Argentina,” Studies in Comparative International Development 35 (Winter 2001)Google Scholar.

⁹² The Peronists and their allies were able to retain a large majority in both houses of Congress well into the fall of 1997.

⁹³ Remmer, Karen and Wibbels, Erik, “The Subnational Politics of Economic Development: Provincial Politics and Fiscal Performance in Argentina,” Comparative Political Studies 33, no. 4 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sawers, Larry, The Other Argentina (Boulder, Colo.: Westview, 1996)Google Scholar; and Jones, Mark, Sanguinetti, Pablo, and Tommasi, Mariano, “Politics, Institutions, and Fiscal Performance in a Federal System: An Analysis of the Argentine Provinces,” Journal of Development Economics 61, no. 2 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹⁴ See Gibson and Calvo (fn. 91).

⁹⁵ Ibid.

⁹⁶ Ibid. The provinces pledged to cooperate with the federal government in (1) limiting taxes on real estate and car registration; (2) limiting some municipal taxes; (3) eliminating some provincial taxes; (4) deregulating many economic activities; (5) privatizing provincially owned companies; and (6) diminishing employer's compensations from 80 percent to 30 percent.

⁹⁷ The Co-Participation Law fixed the amount of federal taxes going to each province. However, based upon the interviews with senior civil servants in the Ministries of the Economy and the Interior, Menem often delayed payments to provinces controlled by opposition parties while granting to Peron-ist provinces higher shares of the tax base when new negotiations took place to reconfigure the tax-sharing mechanism. Author interviews with Argentine government officials, Buenos Aires, March 2002.

⁹⁸ Author interview with former minister and presidential adviser Roberto Dromi, Buenos Aires, March 2002.

⁹⁹ Data mentioned above come from the Dirrecion Nacional de la Coordination con las Provincias.

¹⁰⁰ La Nación, May 12, 2002.

¹⁰¹ La Nación, November 20, 2001.

¹⁰² Grupo Sophia, “Gasto en Funcionarios Políticos, Funcionarios Temporarios y legisladores,” Documento de Trabajo (Buenos Aires, 2001).

¹⁰³ A typical case was that of former Peronist deputy Miguel Nacul, who in 1995 solicited the immediate transfer to him of $550, 000 in ATNs, supposedly to attend to the needs of several towns in the province of Tucuman. Yet in a hand-written letter addressed to the Ministry of the Interior, Nacul mentions that $275, 000 was to cover his own expenditures without specifying their nature. About $300, 000 was eventually disbursed, but the problem is that ATNs could not be sent to individuals, thus prompting the charge of illegal use of federal funds. See La Nation, October 22, 2001, and May 20, 2002.

¹⁰⁴ Clarín, August 6, 2001.

¹⁰⁵ Ibid.

¹⁰⁶ As one of the beneficiaries testified before a judge, “Some fellows approached me and said that I could have received a pension had my family and 1 voted for the Peronists.” See La Nación, September 3, 2001. Equally troubling were early indications that similar frauds had been perpetrated in different parts of the country.

¹⁰⁹ Data provided by the Ministerio de Justicia y Derechos Humanos, Oficina Anticorrupción (September 2001).

¹¹⁰ Washington Post, February 27, 2002.

¹¹¹ Grupo Sophia (fn. 102).

¹¹² La Nación, June 10, 2001.

¹¹³ La Nación, November 4, 2001.