Six leading presidential candidates in Costa Rica took part in a debate on Monday organized by Noticias Columbia and Universidad Latina, focusing largely on the potential suspension of individual constitutional guarantees as a response to rising crime and insecurity.
The candidates present were Claudia Dobles Camargo (Coalición Agenda Ciudadana), Fabricio Alvarado Muñoz (Nueva República), Ariel Robles Barrantes (Frente Amplio), Álvaro Ramos Chaves (Partido Liberación Nacional), José Aguilar Berrocal (Avanza), and Laura Fernández Delgado (Partido Pueblo Soberano).
During the debate, the candidates split into two clear groups over whether to support or oppose declaring a state of exception that would suspend certain civil liberties. Those supporting the measure included Fabricio Alvarado, Laura Fernández, and José Aguilar Berrocal. Opposing it were Álvaro Ramos, Claudia Dobles, and Ariel Robles.
Moderator Evelyn Fachler summarized this division after an extended discussion where “state of exception” became the main topic, overtaking other issues related to democratic governance.
Alvarado argued for using a state of exception under extreme circumstances as allowed by the constitution. He said such measures would target criminals specifically: “Good families will thank us for doing it,” he stated while criticizing the current government’s handling of security.
Fernández agreed with this approach: “Here no one is going to persecute good people,” she said, promising to continue tough security policies if elected.
Aguilar Berrocal also saw the state of exception as a constitutional tool but emphasized it should be used only as a last resort with legislative approval. He suggested that effective police action could make such measures unnecessary.
On the opposing side, Robles warned that suspending guarantees would restrict fundamental freedoms such as movement and assembly. “How can we agree with that in a democracy?” he asked, calling such proposals an attack on people’s rights and linking them to authoritarian regimes’ beginnings.
Dobles said using institutions to silence critics weakens democracy and compared these practices to regional authoritarian models. She argued that increased homicides should be addressed through education and prevention rather than suspending rights.
Ramos rejected suspending rights entirely, instead proposing increased resources for law enforcement: “It’s not just telling people they are free to go out; they must be able to do so without fear.” He advocated selective tougher penalties for serious crimes without resorting to emergency powers.
Personal accusations also surfaced during the debate, especially between Alvarado and Fernández regarding past professional interactions. The exchanges led moderator Fachler to intervene several times for order among applause and jeers from attendees.
Other topics discussed included education quality—where Aguilar proposed international partnerships like those with OECD countries—and economic measures such as tax relief days suggested by Alvarado. Dobles called for inclusive job creation strategies; Fernández promised new non-contributory pensions; Ramos advocated legal reforms prioritizing serious crimes; Robles emphasized community participation in public policy planning.
The debate reflected deep divisions over how best to address Costa Rica’s security challenges within its democratic framework.
