By Luis Manuel Aguana
It seems that the question of why it is
necessary to make another consultation with the Venezuelan people has not been
sufficiently answered, in spite of the many lines and many hours spent on radio
and video programs on social networks by ANCO representatives. Today again the
question arose in the interesting debate promoted by the journalist José
Domingo Blanco, Mingo, in his morning program today Thursday 03-08-2020, with
the presence of Dr. Blanca Rosa Marmol and Adriana Vigilanza. And I attribute
it to the unfortunate habit of most people of not reading more than 240
characters on Twitter or wanting to know the answers to a situation of such
serious complexity as the Venezuelan one in 20 minutes of internet radio
programs. It is very possible that this explanation will not be read either -
"for long"- but it is obligatory for me to do so. And I won't get tired of it...
There was something that stayed with me in
the explanation of the story I made in my previous note (see Return to the
people their primitive sovereignty, en https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/p/blog-page_732.html) and for the important thing I don't know how I missed it. I've
explained this so much that things have already fallen by the wayside. It must
be that I am getting old in this...
I indicated in my last note that the National
Assembly decided in 2017 not to use the way of a Consultative Referendum
proposed by ANCO and announced in the Chacao Theater using the way of Art. 71,
modifying the approach towards a Popular Consultation based on Art. 70 of the
Constitution. That was my explanation so far. What I did not mention is that
the consultation we were proposing had its fundamental axis in that the people
would repeal through that Referendum the Presidential Decrees 2830 and 2831
that unconstitutionally ordered that referendum, MAKING THE CONSULTATION SWING
AROUND THAT ONE ISSUE.
When
you misrepresent the origin of a message from the beginning, the different
people who reply to it take it away and put it back until in the end what comes
out is not even a shadow of what was initially sent. The ORIGINAL message
proposed by ANCO for the Consultation that ended up taking place on 16J-2017
was to reject the Constituent Assembly that the regime had convoked without
having the constitutional attribution to do so. This only corresponded to the
People of Venezuela in a referendum.
How was that original message twisted? By
incorporating the two additional questions that Venezuelans equally answered in
the affirmative because we all wanted the regime to leave. Then something that
began by repealing the Decrees that ordered the Constituent on 30J-2017 through
the application of Article 71 of the Constitution for special matters of
national transcendence for the convocation of an illegitimate Constituent, (and
that the people could perfectly do it in consultation) was transformed into a
referendum to order the convocators, the National Assembly, to get out of
Maduro through the change of the Public Powers in the third question,
establishing a Government of National Union.
In ANCO
we did not object to that change but it seemed wrong to do so and finally we
all know that it ended very badly by being equally deceived as the rest of the
Venezuelans, because the mandataries (1) ignored the order given by the
Venezuelan people, negotiating the result of the Consultation with the regime,
and we did not achieve either one or the other, neither to stop the
illegitimate Constituent nor to remove Maduro.
I can
only say that the common people of Venezuela are not aware of this. But it is
important to explain to you in plain language that it is one thing to order
someone to sell you a car, and then to see him driving around in it with his
girlfriend, to take it off and sell it yourself. It's not the same thing, is
it? Well, that's what happened on 16J-2017. We asked the politicians in the
National Assembly to throw Maduro out and they didn't do it and they negotiated
with him. This time we are the ones who will throw him out, not them. And that
can be done now because we Venezuelans have since 1999 the capacity to DIRECTLY
EXERCISE SOVEREIGNTY because that is established in Article 5 since that year.
With Article 4 of the previous Constitution of 1961 it could not be done
because we could only exercise Sovereignty THROUGH the Organs of Public Power,
in other words through those who we elected by means of suffrage. NOW THAT IS
NOT ONLY THAT, and we Venezuelans should already understand that. The political
representatives no longer have the exclusivity of our sovereignty, so you can
"sell your car" if you want, as many times as you want and when you
want. That
is, EXERCISE YOUR SOVEREIGNTY.
Then,
returning to the discussion of whether "we already did a consultation on
16J-2017", the matter becomes a little clearer. From then on, people were
left with the distorted idea that "we already did a consultation to get
Maduro out" and it is definitely not so because of the way it was done and
because of those who had the obligation to honor it. Going back to the example
of the car, would you consider that your car was sold when you gave your friend
the mandate to do so and he didn't do it? No, would you? The car was not sold
at that time but will be sold when you sell it yourself! So you didn't sell it
the first time...
This is
what we have tried to explain by all means, without success, without yet having
the political reasons set out in my previous notes. And there is still an
intense discussion in the networks where they insult us "because we
already did a Consultation on 16J-2017". Please! Until when? Because those
who want, for whatever interested reason, be it political or otherwise, or
ignorance itself, to insist on that, definitely have a hidden agenda. And by
ignorant I do not mean to insult anyone. My father, who was a distinguished
educator, insisted that ignorant is the person who ignores, who does not know
and must be taught. That is the basis of education. And this time it is about
citizen education. Many people are interested in keeping people in ignorance by
sending that distorted message over and over again for compelling reasons, many
of them aimed at disqualifying the President in Charge for embracing this Civil
Society solution, or leaving Maduro where he is, in Miraflores. In any case, let's not
allow that to happen...
Caracas,
September 3, 2020
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
(1) Erratum: the word in the original article
when published was erroneously "constituents ", when the correct word
was "mandataries ". It was corrected on
07-09-2020
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario