OPINION: Indefinite Re-Election Amendment Shows Corruption of System in Venezuela

The Editors of Veneconomy evidence how Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez as a modern caudillo with Petro-Dollars and a system he designed and leaders he appointed to the various branches of government means no checks and balances -- and prove exactly why Venezuela should not have an indefinite re-election amendment.

From the Editors of Veneconomy: Hugo Chávez's obsession with remaining in power for life has generated an apparently endless spiral of illegalities and has brought to light, as never before, the putrefaction that reigns in the different branches of government under Chavista rule.

It is no longer merely a matter of the presidential proposal to submit an amendment (on reelection) to referendum being unconstitutional, per se, the issue now also has to do with the fact that it has been possible for the proposal to go ahead thanks to the consent and complacency of the representatives of all branches of government, clearly demonstrating their subordination to the Executive. To comply with Chávez's wishes, the Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ) has not hesitated to contradict decisions handed down in previous years, among them its Decision No. 51 of March 18, 2002, in the case of the Venezuelan Teachers' Federation versus the National Electoral Council, and Decision No. 73 of March 30, 2006, in which it issued its opinion on alternation in public office established in the Constitution. In these and other decisions, the TSJ made it clear that Venezuela 's system of laws has established the principle of alternation -- applicable to any elected public office -- as a fundamental right and democratic premise since the Constitution of 1830.

The National Assembly is another branch of government that has joined the band of unconstitutional subordinates. The Chavista parliament not only approved Chávez's amendment proposal in the wink of an eye, but it meekly drafted the question to be put to the people in the referendum following the President's recommendations. Yet, no matter how hard they try to make over and disguise the proposal, its contents continue to reflect the proposal of an indefinite presidential mandate put forward in the Constitutional Reform that was rejected in December 2007.

As for the enthralled National Electoral Council (CNE), it has risen to the occasion by demonstrating an efficiency that was conspicuous by its absence during the 2004 recall referendum. Despite the fact that it still has not received the official petition to hold the amendment referendum from the National Assembly, it has already drawn up a schedule of activities. What is even worse, in order to speed up the process to meet the President's requirements, it has decided not to open the electoral roll as required by the suffrage law, ambiguously claiming “technical reasons.” As is well known, the road to hell is full of such “good” reasons.

What gives most cause for concern in this decision by the CNE is that it violates the right of hundreds of thousands of young Venezuelans. This is a case of blatant political discrimination against new voters, a segregation that is classified as a violation of universal human rights, for which there is no statute of limitations. In short, the road to the reelection amendment is riddled with flagrant violations of the Constitution, the laws of the Republic, and the political rights of Venezuelans established in international law.