Unlike the electoral issue, there is no way to address the constituent issue without generating some kind of controversy. Elections are a subject that everyone can easily understand. But, on the contrary, a Constituent proposal, as I have already insisted in many opportunities, depends on the context and the political moment because its call is highly subordinated to those factors. And in an unstable Venezuela, change is the only permanent thing.
ANCO has raised, long before it was founded, and through its main promoters, the need to refound the Republic as a principled concept, in the face of the institutional destruction initiated by the regime with the Constituent Assembly of 1999. I will not go here again to explain what we understand by “institutional destruction”, but I believe that every Venezuelan has a pretty clear idea, even if it is a distant one, of what this means.
We have had differences with many political factors, not only on the need to make the necessary institutional changes for the country, because I believe that at least they are convinced of that, after years of hammering on that issue. However, what we have never agreed on is the precise moment at which they should be applied.
In other words, it is not that they disagree with holding a Constituent Convention, as we are calling from now on an Original National Constituent Assembly, but that they believe in good faith that it should be held AFTER the main political problem of the country has been solved, which is none other than getting rid of the tyranny that has plagued us for a little more than 25 years. And on top of that, we are still discussing “how soon” it should be done because, as we have already noticed, some factors insist on taking that vital decision long after leaving the regime, something we strongly disagree with.
There are many political leaders, even qualified ones, who are still unaware of the scope of such a process, understanding in a limited way what happened in 1999 with “Chávez's Constituent Assembly”, thinking that if this process were to be carried out again, the same mistakes would be repeated. Chávez premeditatedly used in the most abject manner the original power of the people for his ends of perpetuating his power. That is like concluding that nuclear energy is harmful because the Chernobyl disaster occurred. And it is clear that the tool must be used well for the benefit of the people and to ensure that there will not be another disaster in the future when it is used again. At ANCO we have spent years getting to know it very thoroughly, starting with defining how and when it should be convened, although that depends on the political context and moment.
After ANCO's call in its Communiqué-Proclamation of February 24, to oppose a Citizen Rebellion against the proposed un-Constitutional Reform of the regime of Nicolás Maduro Moros, in order to impose a Communal Constitution (see in Spanish ANCO Communiqué-Proclamation, in https://ancoficial.blogspot.com/2025/02/comunicado-proclama-anco-hagamos-una.html), have arisen -again- valid questions that must be clearly answered, related to this new Constituent call that we are making because clearly the political context has changed again.
And what has changed? Nothing less than the fact that we now have a President elected with the majority of the votes of the Venezuelan people, who was denied his victory after a coup d'état against the will of the people. And, on the other hand, there is now a legitimate political leadership in hiding and under persecution. Regardless of the fact that the President Elect has not been sworn in for the full exercise of his functions established in the Constitution, as we have argued several times in this corner of the web, and that the electoral process of July 28, 2024 is still open and is still being fought for, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THIS IS THE ONLY FIGHT THAT CAN BE GIVEN IN VENEZUELA for the recovery of freedom and democracy.
And that is fundamentally the approach. In August 2023, before the primaries of October 2023, in an interview with journalist Rafael Galicia, María Corina Machado (MCM) pronounced herself against calling the Constituent Assembly process beyond that political moment (see The constituent proposal of María Corina Machado, in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/the-constituent-proposal-of-maria.html).
At that time, MCM thought -in our opinion erroneously- that a Constituent Assembly would impose one part of the country over the other, as it happened in 1999, and believed that it was possible to govern the country “for a while” with the 1999 Constitution, with the rest of the public powers against it. The thesis of a polarized Venezuela was dissolved on July 28, 2024, where an overwhelming majority decided in favor of democracy and freedom. Again, it is important to note that the political context of Venezuela has changed since then, so MCM should have changed its mind on the subject.
How would the Citizen Rebellion approach the July 28th struggle? My answer would be COMPLEMENTING the struggle to make effective the will of the people of July 28, with a CALL by POPULAR INITIATIVE to a Constituent Convention to achieve: 1) That the Venezuelan people inside and outside Venezuela express their rejection to an un-Constitutional Reform carried out by the regime, giving in that same act their approval for the convocation to the owner of the sovereignty, to a National Constituent Assembly (Article 348); and 2) Approve inclusive Bases for that convocation.
Why could this act become effective, even though it has not been possible to “collect” the July 28th? “ANCO's approach to Venezuelans in the face of what the political sectors propose to offer the same and expect different results ... is to negotiate, with the support of the International Community, a Refoundation of the Nation ... through an Original National Constituent Assembly convened this year, with an ad-hoc Electoral Tribunal (established by the parties for that purpose only), with internationally established guarantees of compliance, and independent from the Public Powers kidnapped by the tyranny” (see Options for a house called Venezuela, in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/options-for-house-called-venezuela.html).
If in the midst of the discussion with the U.S. to make the result of July 28 be respected, a Constituent Consultation is held, both with Venezuelans who are in the country and those who are abroad, gathering a higher number of wills than those established in Article 348 of the Constitution (15% of the Civil and Electoral Registry), such Constituent Convention would be of mandatory compliance for those who exercise power in Venezuela; and in the event that the Maduro regime persists in remaining in power, in a true negotiation with them that includes guarantees of compliance between the opposition represented by MCM, the US and the regime, an ad-hoc Electoral Tribunal would be established, with the technical support of the UN and the OAS, outside the Venezuelan public powers, to carry out the constituent election. This proposal would constitute a peaceful, electoral and constitutional solution conditioned by the strength of the geopolitical incorporation of the USA to the negotiation.
Once in office, this Constituent Convention would have the broad constituent powers necessary to enforce the result of July 28, begin the institutional reconstruction of Venezuela and produce a new Constitution.
Even without holding the constituent election, the political earthquake caused by the will of the people, expressed in millions of signatures to call for the Constituent Convention, would be a formidable civic protest to oppose the unconstitutional Reform and would constitute a pending mandate for the new President of Venezuela, clearly establishing that Venezuelans reject a constitutional change without the participation of the people, the legitimate owner of sovereignty, as clearly expressed in Article 5 of the Constitution.
In this way, the contradiction of having run into an electoral dead end would be resolved. That is to say, after July 28 it is not possible to hold another election in Venezuela with the current public powers, and at the same time hope to peacefully solve the political problem with the regime. Everything expressed so far by opposition spokespersons, including MCM, insist on reaching a peaceful solution but without failing to materialize the result of July 28. This is a contradictory approach that carries an implicit route of force that is not contemplated from inside or outside the country, and which is unlikely to materialize, at least in the short term.
A Constituent process would be the last solution foreseen in our Magna Carta, which would not only stop the regime's un-Constitutional Reform, but would open the options for all factors to reach political agreements, leaving it to the Venezuelan people to finally decide their destiny. In other words, let the people decide!
And you will ask me: and why would the regime respect the decision of the Constituent when it did not respect the decision of the Venezuelan people on July 28? Why would Maduro respect such an agreement? And I would answer like Trump during Zelenski's official visit in the Oval Office of the White House, answering why Putin had always violated the agreements signed with Ukraine: because he was not President of the USA!... If that is so, then those are the opportunities that the opposition has criminally squandered in the past, and that guarantee has 4 years left. Let us not miss that opportunity again, and let us take advantage of it while we still can....
Caracas, March 7, 2025
Blog:
TIC’s & Derechos Humanos, https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario