There is no meeting to which I am invited where someone, known or not, tells you "Constituent Assembly? That takes a long time and the regime would prevent it!” I have decided to no longer answer something to which I have dedicated myself to respond in writing in multiple ways and in different opportunities and media. Maybe this is one more, but answers like realities transform with time. If someone would give me a bolivar devalued for the time that has passed, every time I have been asked that question, we would have made that constituent at least 10 times and I would be a millionaire in dollars.
I believe it is very important for all of us to update the response to this constituent "how to", not only because the political conditions of the country have changed but also because now the regime and its submissive opposition have embarked on a strategy of "normalization", which although it is difficult for the population to buy them because they are still going through hunger and misery due to everything we already know, and especially the compatriots who do not live in Caracas, they intend to sell to the outside and inside of the country, the perception that Venezuelans have already passed the stage of confrontation with these criminals and are ready to coexist with them, so we must move towards a stage of coexistence. If this is reinforced by a civil society signing letters to the world asking for the softening of sanctions, we ourselves will be the ones nailing the nails of the coffin where the regime will bury us.
First of all, I must here give special emphasis to the fact that the constituent process itself has already been bought by the majority of Venezuelans, at least by those who have a genuine love for this country and believe that the reconstruction (or construction) of a new institutional framework for the Republic is necessary. Although it is true that some differ from our decentralization and federation project, they do believe it is necessary and important to discuss a country for the new generations after the destruction that has been done. Where there are differences is in how we get there. And this has been the stumbling block in the discussions of our project in ANCO.
At this point we must differentiate two things: whether we are talking about a Constituent Assembly to get out of the regime, or whether we are talking about a Constituent Assembly to Refound the Nation. Because although both things are not mutually exclusive, they are two concepts that, when applied together, detract strength from what was fundamentally ANCO's original proposal, which is none other than to achieve a change in the paradigm of power in Venezuela.
I must state that I was not
won to this project years ago for the conceptual purpose of "getting out
of the Chávez regime". That was to come about as a consequence of fully
understanding the higher goal of discussing the institutional foundations of
the country. That in order to do so, it was indispensable that the regime be
deposed before beginning to establish the new foundational bases of Venezuela
and for that we proposed a project that we now call The Great Change.
However, at some point along this path, the chicha was mistaken for lemonade, and people thought that the Constituent Assembly was a kind of poison to kill the authoritarian regime that oppresses us. And that could be so if it was understood that if that is what the Venezuelan people want, then by convening the Constituent Assembly, the same people should be the ones to decide to do so through their legitimate representation.
But unfortunately, the Constitutional history of Venezuela tells us that this has never been done in this way in our country. That the Constituent Constitutions have been the result of the wishes of a ruler who comes to power again and summons the Constituent, as Hugo Chávez Frías did in 1999. This way of doing it gives that ruler the possibility of manufacturing a constitution to his own specifications -as Chávez did- to remain in power. That is why it is very important for Venezuelans to understand that unless we previously call for the Constituent Assembly, that is, with the current ruler in office, the next one to come may very well prevent the initiative or call for it as he sees fit.
Hence, our first option is to convene the constituent process BEFORE there is a new ruler and the people decide through their legitimate representation what to do with the illegitimate occupant of Miraflores, establish a new transitional government, discuss a new Social Pact to be reflected in a new Constitution, and then convene elections based on the rules of a new Magna Carta.
These explanations are not easy to make over coffee. Proposing an unprecedented path has always been very uphill for the proponents. That's why everyone tells us "Constituent Assembly? Very well, but that has to be done afterwards!” But then it will not be done or it will be tailored to the needs of those in power at that later time. Then, we must guarantee that in the event of a Constituent after the exit of the regime, there are enough of us in the country with a clear conscience to prevent a deviation similar to that of Chávez in 1999.
The latter leads us to the following conclusion: Will we be able to convince a country that the only thing on its mind is to get out of this tragedy first, before thinking about anything else? Maybe we can, but time is consuming us. The Constituent Assembly is not an end in itself. It is a means to discuss a project for a country, and that requires previously having solved the issue of a legitimate and stable government. And although this is the responsibility of those in the political sector who have forgotten their obligations towards Venezuelans, someone must reflect on it so that we can believe in a better future for our children and grandchildren in this country.
The approach we are taking now is for all the protagonists of this tragedy to sit down and discuss the country through a Constituent Assembly, which I believe is not a bad approach, even if it sounds utopian. I believe this is not a bad approach, even if it sounds utopian. And who are these protagonists? The International Community (headed by the US), the opposition recognized by that International Community, the Venezuelans organized through their civil society organizations that do not feel represented by anyone for a myriad of valid reasons, and finally the regime. That is the true dialogue. ALL those involved. That is our "constituent how to". That is the way in which the regime would allow a Constituent Assembly, and the way in which that same regime would be obliged to comply with the mandate that comes out of the Venezuelan people, by coming out of a true agreement where an International Community participates and obliges the regime to comply with the obligations that come out of that dialogue between 4 parties. In this way, there would be no winners and losers.
If real peace is desired in this country, we will have to build it among all of us. A dialogue between two parties that do not represent the Venezuelan people is worthless. And if the International Community, starting with the US, believe that they will have stability in Venezuela and in the region because of anything that comes out of Mexico, they have not understood Venezuelans. In the meantime, we Venezuelans will continue evaluating our options, whatever they may be...
Caracas, April 21, 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