Suscribete a TICs & Derechos Humanos

And after 16N what?

By Luis Manuel Aguana

The level of a country's political leadership is definitely evidenced by the quality of the solutions they provide to the problems they face. A few weeks after the Sao Paulo Forum's attack on Chilean democracy, on November 15, the opposition and the government of President Sebastián Piñera designed a political agreement in the Chilean Congress that put an end to what was considered in the region a serious fissure in the continent's democracy, giving a civil and democratic course to the crisis.

As our friend Antonio Sánchez García points out in one of his last enlightening notes about the crisis in his native country: "The difference, the brutal difference between the political managers in Chile, with respect to Venezuela and Cuba, the latter countries incomparably less gifted, cultured, experienced and rigorous in the friendly-enemy battles that usually characterize the management of public affairs, is that in Chile the political, cultural and media parties and institutions dominate the art of sublimating, metabolizing and digesting their political conflicts without their roofs collapsing..." (see in Spanish Antonio Sánchez García, El despertador barbudo in

Indeed, that country is not only more economically developed than ours, but also more politically developed. It was able to "digest" in hours the serious problem they had, finding the best solution: to consult the popular Sovereignty, which only resides in the Chilean people, the reconstruction of the Social Pact, and which is finally established in a new Constitution.

Even if Chilean politicians dominate "the art of sublimating, metabolizing and digesting their political conflicts without their roofs collapsing," as Sánchez García says, why is it so difficult for Venezuelan politicians to understand that the solution to our conflict also involves citizen participation? Why insist on unleashing a violent rupture from within to bring about change? The 23F, 30A and now the 16N with a march without citizen support, tried to ignite in the streets a conflict that would end, according to his calculations, in a displacement of the power of the Maduro regime.

That insistence on repeating and repeating the same thing, hoping for different results, is the "Einsteinian" definition of madness, as the genius rightly indicated. And the most serious thing is that they try to apply the same "street" solution in the worst conditions that we Venezuelans have ever had, and that is worsening every day that passes with the incessant flight of hundreds of compatriots from the country, added to the most serious economic tragedy that Venezuela has ever experienced in its history. How can the official opposition call a street "without return" to a people that dies of hunger, that has to go out every day to pull out almost every devalued Bolivar from the air in order to feed itself? In what country lives Juan Guaidó and his people? And after 16N what? What lack of interpretation of the political moment we live in!

What did the official opposition achieve on 16N beyond the frustration and annoyance of Venezuelans? The Chileans set off their internal conflict in days with a solution that served them all. And far from making hateful comparisons between the situations of two different peoples, we, with the support that has never been given nationally and internationally to any politician in Venezuela, with this opposition at the forefront, have not been able to generate a solution in more than 10 months. And I don't think it's a lack of imagination. The facts have shown that the shots are rather on the sides of corruption and cohabitation with the regime, behind the backs of the interests of Venezuelans.

Given the importance that this Chile agreement could have for Venezuela, I would like to quote its first 4 points, publicly read from the Peace Agreement and the new Constitution of Chile, presented by the president of the Chilean Senate, Jaime Quintana. (see in Spanish Histórico Acuerdo por una nueva Constitución, in

"Faced with the serious political and social crisis of the country, in response to the mobilization of citizens and the call made by His Excellency President Sebastián Piñera, the undersigned parties have agreed on an institutional solution whose objective is to seek peace and social justice through an unobjectionably democratic procedure:

1.- The parties that sign this agreement guarantee their commitment to the restoration of peace and public order in Chile and full respect for human rights and democratic institutions in force;
2.- A Plebiscite will be held in April 2020 to resolve two questions:
a.      Do you want a new Constitution? I approve - I reject
b.      What kind of organ should draft the new Constitution?
                                                              i.      Mixed Constitutional Convention
                                                            ii.      Constitutional Convention
3.- The Mixed Constitutional Convention shall be composed in equal parts of members elected for the purpose and serving parliamentarians;
4.- In the case of the Constitutional Convention, its members shall be fully elected for this purpose. The election of the members of both bodies shall take place in October 2020, together with the Regional and Municipal elections under universal suffrage with the same electoral system that governs the elections of deputies in the corresponding proportion;

Only two questions will be asked of the Chilean people so that they can decide whether or not they want a new Social Pact that resolves their internal political and social differences, and which will then be translated into a Constitutional text that adapts to the new times. In the same way as it will be that organ that in Venezuela we call the National Constituent Assembly, asking if it will include or not the deputies of the current Congress of the Republic. If the Chileans succeed in resolving their differences with that or not, it will be up to them to decide. But whatever comes out will come out of what its citizens say. That is the real bottom line! That is what is really important! In Venezuela we will ask the people to decide in due course and like Chile, a Constituent process of Original character. In ANCO we are committed to that. But first we have to get out of the usurper regime with the power that only Popular Sovereignty gives.

That is exactly what we have proposed from ANCO: Let the Venezuelan people decide! The situation in Venezuela is much more complex than in Chile, given that here we are subject to a delinquent regime supported by terrorism and international drug cartels. However, the solution goes in exactly the same direction: to submit to the consideration of Venezuelans, both inside and outside the country, the route to follow to solve the problem. That is why we will have to work hard to find a way for the Venezuelan people to speak out.

From ANCO we have proposed a procedure that ends in a consultation to the Popular Sovereignty, and that later the mandate of the people is fulfilled, in spite of the regime. We have been describing this procedure for months now (see in Spanish Porqué un Plebiscito SI y unas Elecciones NO en Venezuela, in, and Plebiscito: Que el pueblo decida el cese de la usurpación, en so I won't repeat it here. However, the minimum questions that we propose are adapted to the trilogy that will be announced to the country on January 23rd:

“1) CESSATION OF THE USURPATION. Do you approve the immediate cessation of the usurpation of the illegitimate powers exercised by Nicolás Maduro Moros as President, the National Constituent Assembly, the Moral Citizen Council, the Supreme Court of Justice, and the National Electoral Council? (*)

(*) The will of the citizenship is expressly declared based on the principle of popular sovereignty and articles 5,22,23 and 70 of the Constitution, which the National Constituent Assembly (ANC) assumes illegitimate on August 3 of 2017 and therefore all its null and ineffective acts, to initiate the process of reparation of popular sovereignty and in the case of not ceasing this usurpation, I authorize countries to assume the obligation to take measures to liberate and help the people of Venezuela and stop the violation of human rights in accordance with the doctrine of the UN and the approval by the National Assembly of the TIAR already approved by the OAS.

2) TRANSITION GOVERNMENT Do you require and authorize the Citizen President of the National Assembly as President in Charge of the Republic that, in accordance with the current Constitution, within thirty days designate a provisional Government of national unity to initiate the change of Political administrative and constitutional model of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela?

3) FREE ELECTIONS Do you order that the provisional transition government, as soon as possible, convene and hold free, fair, transparent elections, with a new electoral system and audited to legitimize the exercise of Public Power in Venezuela, organized, directed and monitored with the participation of a new directive of the CNE, of the Venezuelan people, their social, union, civil and political organizations and international supervision? ”
These questions are in a process of permanent and exhaustive revision by a legal and political team of ANCO throughout the country, to expand and/or modify them; and they give an idea to Venezuelans that there are people in the country who think in another way of proposing the departure of Nicolás Maduro Moros, without expecting or requiring from them more blood sacrifices in the streets of Venezuela, as a consequence of the incapacity and/or corruption of the political leadership of the official opposition. Hopefully, Venezuela after 16N will understand that it is only required that the people claim and firmly demand from their representatives their right to political participation established in the Constitution, without interception of any nature. That is much more sensible than going out on the streets without purpose, led by people who still believe that Venezuelans are a bunch of assholes with no criteria. Thank God the 16N streets of Venezuela proved otherwise.

Caracas, November 17, 2019


No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario