In my home we developed a special respect for the date April 19, not only because it was the patriotic date that it really is, but also because it was my father's birthday. As a professor of Social Sciences (see in Spanish the life of Dr. Raúl Aguana Figuera, in http://universidadculturaycivilizacion.blogspot.com/p/biografia.html), My father was very attached to the civilian significance of that particular date for his life and he made his cadet students of the Venezuelan Military School and EFOFAC (former Officer Training School of the Armed Forces of Cooperation) see it that way.
That historical significance of April 19 pointed to the civilian disregard of an authority that Venezuelans of that time considered irritating and usurping. Unfortunately, none of those officers who were my father's students are still active (they are all retired or deceased), and those who exist now do not have the conviction, due to the training imparted in their own School, that the military must always be subject to civilian power and authority. Time has dissolved that conviction, leaving Venezuelans at the mercy of a soldiery in the style of the 19th century militia, with no training on the role they should play vis-à-vis the citizens. Otherwise, there would not be a barracks regime that oppresses liberties and suppresses democracy in Venezuela.
April 19, 1810 marked the formal and historical beginning of Venezuela's Independence. There was no elementary school student in this country who did not know the history of that Holy Thursday when the Cabildo of Caracas met and disowned the authority of the new Spanish leader Don Vicente de Emparan, constituting itself as the Supreme Board of Caracas, until the installation of the First Constituent Congress on March 2, 1811.
This background gives us enough justification to: a) consider that this is a profoundly civil date and that it commemorates the first time that Venezuelan civil society imposed itself over a usurper ruler; and b) establish by the citizens a transitional government until the convocation of a Constituent Congress that would define the destiny of the Republic. Then history did the rest.
The Constituent meaning of this date is unequivocal, and although it is part of our historical calendar, few people see it beyond the story of that Spanish ruler who once said "I don't want to rule either" on April 19, at the behest of a priest named Madariaga, and from there Venezuela declared itself independent, the event being something much more profound than that.
The same happens to us with the approach and the Constituent proposal. The simplistic character with which we generally approach the issues, make us make decisions of rejection right off the bat without waiting to know the background of the matter. And much of this responsibility may be due to the fact that it is not easy to compare complex approaches such as this one with the simplicity with which a presidential or parliamentary election can be understood.
In several interventions and interviews through social networks, I have stated that in order to carry out the Constituent Assembly process in this historic moment in Venezuela, where all options -including the electoral one- have been exhausted so that Venezuelans can get out of this crisis, it is urgently required to enter into a political negotiation process that includes ALL those involved in the Venezuelan tragedy: the International Community, the official opposition, the regime, but above all, a qualified representation of the civil society, that is, those of us who are ultimately the main mourners of this tragedy. For that it is a fundamental requirement to have the International Community, starting with the USA, working in favor of this initiative, because they are the only ones capable of sitting the regime down to negotiate this solution. Otherwise, in my opinion, it is illusory to propose this solution to Venezuelans.
Some have reacted in a virulent manner to the proposal to include the regime in this negotiation, and I could agree with them. But if we are realistic, we have to sit down to negotiate with the kidnappers so that they release the hostages, which are all Venezuelans. On the other hand, a CONSTITUTIONAL process, conceptually only makes sense if all Venezuelans are included, without distinction of political partiality. And that includes those who still believe in those in power, who are equally Venezuelans. There cannot be such a thing as a Constituent Assembly only "of the opposition", just as there cannot be a Constituent Assembly only "of the government".
Those who believe that the country will be stable by making a constituent assembly "of the opposition" are riding on a fantasy. Chávez made a constituent assembly only "of the government" in 1999, explicitly leaving the opposition out of the process with a biased Bases Comiciales. From then on, the country has never been stable and the events of 2002-11 were the irrefutable proof of this. And there is still no social peace, but the peace of the barracks and the cemeteries, as happened during the tyranny of Juan Vicente Gómez. This without taking into account the other "of the government" carried out by Maduro in July 2017, with worse consequences.
And going back to the requirement, such as the fundamental support to this initiative from the International Community -the USA-, it has been very difficult to achieve. Among other reasons, because those who should encourage such support are against a constituent assembly, since they would be the first to be put on trial and rejected in the process. The official opposition never gave its approval to the convocation of the Constituent Assembly, even when it had the golden opportunity to do so and thus solve the country's crisis. The first action of the National Assembly, elected in December 2015, should not have been to take down the pictures of Chávez from the walls of the Parliament, but to summon with 2/3 of its members to a Constituent process and establish the rules to do so (Constitutional Article 348). The regime immediately took away this possibility by removing the qualified majority.
The International Community has never been duly and efficiently informed of this initiative. ANCO has made important efforts to communicate to the countries about this possibility as a serious, constitutional, peaceful and electoral alternative. However, the opposition has gone a long way in convincing the International Community that holding elections with the regime in power will solve the Venezuelan problem and unfortunately they are wrong. Removing the Executive Power with an election -in the hypothetical case that this were to happen- will not replace the rest of the corrupt institutionality of the regime and will deepen the crisis making the country ungovernable.
We have insisted that a fair, transparent and verifiable election is not possible with the regime in control of the Electoral Power, due to the appointment of Rectors coming from an illegitimate Legislative Power. That is why we have proposed the discussion of a negotiated Constituent election with the help of the International Community, as direct arbiter of the electoral process, in a sort of Humanitarian Electoral Intervention, with an "ad-hoc" Electoral Tribunal for Venezuela. This is a solution where we all fit and we can negotiate how it would be carried out among the four participants.
We believe that April 19, 2022 could be a date that will put this initiative back on the table of national and international public opinion, especially if it is promoted from the State of Zulia, a State that has historically raised the banners of autonomy and political and administrative decentralization, fundamental principles on which ANCO's proposal for constitutional change is based, in its project El Gran Cambio (see in Spanish El Gran Cambio, Una propuesta para la Refundación de Venezuela, in https://ancoficial.blogspot.com/p/documentos-fundamentales.html).
If the country is infected by this proposal, it is possible that it could also attract the international community to believe that this is the political solution that best suits the reality of Venezuelans, in order to live in peace and democracy. The fact that it is from Zulia that the hopes of change for this destroyed country are born, is not only an extraordinary endorsement to rescue what April 19, 1810 meant for Venezuela, but also a good omen for the Refoundation of a Republic that began its journey towards freedom by removing a usurper in the Cabildo of Caracas. Let us cherish the hope that the Baralt Theater of Maracaibo will become that Cabildo in the year 2022, starting the process of transformation of Venezuela.
Caracas, April 7, 2022
Blog: https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
Instagram: @laguana01
Telegram: https://t.me/TICsDDHH
Linkedin: www.linkedin.com/in/luis-manuel-aguana-bb9231
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TICs-Derechos-Humanos-102169239041065
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario