Ever since the Government in Charge took the decision to take the fundamental step of holding a Popular Consultation for Venezuelans, accepting ANCO's proposal to call for Popular Sovereignty so that it would be the Venezuelan people who would decide the destiny of the country, everyone wanted to find out what this instrument was about, requesting interviews and forums to clarify something that we had been explaining for more than three years. The fundamentals, the questions, the how it should be done were explained to the President in charge and his closest advisors. Nothing was left out.
However, since this process began, it is well known and communicated that the consultation we proposed and the one the Government in Charge wants to make to the country are not the same. I am not going to judge if the consultation they understood is good or bad. Something is good or bad depending on what you use it for. That is only an instrument. A gun is good if you use it to take care of your family and keep them from getting hurt, but it's bad if you use it to rob people on the street.
If the consultation is used for other purposes than to leave the regime of Nicolás Maduro Moros, it would not be fulfilling the purposes for which it was designed, and thus it is not the consultation proposed to the country by the National Constituent Alliance, ANCO. That is the consultation I have explained in the interviews and forums where I have participated in social networks. But this has a serious problem: people have the mistaken perception that the consultation that is being publicly promoted TODAY by the Government in Charge and the 37 parties of the Pact signed on September 7, IS THE CONSULTATION that ANCO proposed and that IS NOT TRUE.
The Consultation that ANCO proposed is clearly defined in the letter signed by me, as Director of ANCO, to the Organizing Committee of the Popular Consultation, on October 24, 2020 (see the press release dated October 25 in Spanish “Venezuela necesita una potente y esclarecida organización ciudadana”, in https://ancoficial.blogspot.com/2020/10/comunicado-anco-venezuela-necesita-una.html). There we clearly requested that the questions be reconsidered on pain of defrauding the population and that we would not be willing to accompany him. Today is November 1st and still Venezuela believes that ANCO accompanies the questions formulated by the National Assembly in its October 1st 2020 Agreement. That is another consultation very different from the one we proposed.
This confusion, by not clearly defining the questions that will be asked to the Venezuelan people, has generated a very important state of anguish that affects in a decisive way the spirit of participation of the population. The Government in Charge and the parties that decided on the two questions in the October 1st Accord (a month ago!) have deliberately delayed the decision to change the questions (if they are going to do so) for two fundamental reasons: 1) the consultation cannot, according to them, be outside the strategy of the parties to call elections; and 2) the consultation cannot be in any other control than that of the parties.
This "consultation" seen from that perspective kills the very essence of what ANCO proposed to the country. We did not propose to call the Popular Sovereignty to give the approval to the parties to "go to elections". NO. We proposed it so that the Venezuelan people would fundamentally declare themselves for the presence in power of Nicolás Maduro Moros and the rest of the illegitimate institutions in their origin and performance. While the "consultation" is proposed in the terms that were outlined by the parties in the October 1st Accord, they will not allow anyone to take control of it, nor of its administration.
In these circumstances, what is left for civil society to do that we still insist that the questions must be changed following the universally accepted mantra of "Cessation of Usurpation-Transitional Government-Free Elections" so that the people not only participate in its realization, but also attend massively to the act of voting in the Popular Consultation? To continue organizing ourselves massively throughout the country, showing civility and demonstrating that if we are the majority we want to get out of this regime but hoping that is what the parties finally decide to consult the people because we have made it very clear that we will not participate in anything that does not begin with the Cessation of the Usurpation of Maduro and its regime of power, before we can go to a Transitional Government that organizes free, fair and verifiable elections.
Both consultations are mutually exclusive. The first one, the consultation proposed by ANCO, has been very clearly explained in its communiqués and its details are what I answer when someone asks me. The other, beyond the electoral purposes of the Government in Charge, I do not know. In fact, that is the one that has run much faster in the whole country given the communication facilities of the parties and their logistic means.
"Our consultation" (because I must identify it somehow) which has an important component in the decisions of the International Community, has not moved at the same speed because for the purposes of the "other consultation" that is not what is important. If you hold a consultation to support an election you do not need the support of the countries, but if you do it to collect the expulsion of Maduro and his mafia from power, it would be very clear that it requires that you have previously agreed with the countries of the International Community to make effective the Principle of Self-Determination of the Peoples, in case Maduro refuses to go along with the direct mandate of the Venezuelan people. Do you realize that there are two consultations? At some point soon we Venezuelans will know which two consultations will prevail. And we will also know what to do when that happens. That's why I don't even have to say it. At this point we are already cured of the horrors...
Caracas, November 1, 2020
Blog: http://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario