Reasons why it is impossible to impeach president Maduro
What the international press has hailed as the alleged "beginning of a political trial" against President Nicolas Maduro is just another political and legal attempted fraud by Chavez opponents.
Major international media conglomerates – such as Reuters, AFP, AP, EFE, among others, have cartelized around the alleged start of an impeachment against president Nicolás Maduro, without stopping to clarify references to the legal basis of a non-existent procedure within the venezuelan legal order system.
In the information war waged against Venezuela truths do not matter. At war they are the first casualties. The big headline, easy to reproduce and consume, is fundamental and strategic. The more omissions and falsehoods, the better. Or as Henrique Capriles said yesterday, more or less in these words: “The goal of September 1st was to make it known internationally that people wanted change.”
Photo and headlines are self-explanatory, they become means and purposes for antichavecism.
As expressed by the anti-Chavez members of the failed national assembly (NA), this process should culminate with the declaration of "abandonment of office" by the President of the Republic, through a special committee to be appointed soon, in which "a serious breach of the constitutional and democratic order and the devastation of the economic and social foundations of the nation." will be evaluated.
But once again they got it all mixed up.
The relevant elements that condemn to a legal void this mock impeachment do not only emanate from the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, but also from the spokesmanship of its main political leader and president of the national assembly Henry Ramos Allup- and from its main legal consultant.
“Political trial" does not exist in the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
The Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (CBRV) is loud and clear as to the attributions of the National Assembly. "Impeachment" does not appear in any of them as an instrument to be used to cause a dismissal of the President of the Republic by parliamentary means. (as referred to in article 187 of the Constitution)
This mechanism, existing only in parliamentary regimes, is inapplicable in Venezuela given its political configuration: we are a constitutionally presidentialist country. The most similar element to this legal appeal according to the CBRV, is the "vote of no confidence" with which the President can not be touched, and the "declaration of political responsibility", which in order to be applied requires the cooperation of the Citizen Power - composed by the Ombudsman, the Comptroller General of the Republic and the Attorney General of the Republic.
The legal adviser of the National Assembly (NA) does not know the Constitution
The legal consultant of the NA, Jesús María Casal, when interviewed by César Miguel Rondón on August 24th, explained the flimsy grounds that would lead to the initiation of an impeachment process against President Nicolás Maduro.
Casal mentioned two routes of action that the NA should take if it wanted to legally and politically “armour plate” this procedure without any legal foundation. At first, he referred to the political responsibility of the head of state, bringing up Article 232 of the CRBV, which reads: "The President of the Republic is responsible for his/her acts and compliance with the obligations of office. He/She is obligated to endeavour to guarantee the rights and freedoms of Venezuelans and the independence, integrity, territorial sovereignty and defense of the Republic. the declaration of states of exception do not change the principle of his/her responsibility or of the Executive Vice President, nor that of the Ministers in accordance with this Constitution and the law."
The main problem of Casal's advice to the anti-Chavez majority in the NA is basically that President Nicolas Maduro has not violated the constitutional obligations referred to in the article. Casal -condemned -in media terms- the MUD, to take the blind alley of forging evidence that would make visible what both want to hide: a politically forced process, opaque and without legal justification.
Casal then mentioned other articles -235 and 240- to justify that another path to begin impeachment could be to declare the "abandonment of office" of President Nicolas Maduro. Another blind alley for adviser number 1 of the NA: It is an indisputable fact that not only the President of the Republic is in national territory, but is in full exercise of his functions as well. Trying to prove the opposite would be expensive and expose them to ridicule for being a far-fetched claim dissociated from reality. Will they be willing to take that risk?
The turning point under which they attempt to justify an impeachment against President Nicolás Maduro is based on the suspension of the recall referendum due to irregularities during the collection of a 1% of firms in the electoral roll.
The problem that the NA has to deal with, is that the decision to suspend the process was ruled by Criminal Courts in five states of the country, responding to appeals by those affected by the irregularities committed by the MUD (board of democratic union) to repair damage to their political and identity rights, as well as the vices against the process as such. The MUD inteded to revoke president Maduro based on a legal and political fraud.
In other words, the judicial measures that mark this turning point were not taken under a state of emergency or by presidential decree. The National Executive has not been involved in any action regarding the recall referendum.
Thus, it is a botch-up to try to apply to President Nicolas Maduro Articles 232, 235 or 240, since he is not incurring any violation of the alleged offenses referred to in the onstitutional text.
They accuse Maduro of exercising as a "de facto president" (synonymous with dictatorship) based on various legal actions, perfectly adjusted to the law to protect a constitutional remedy -the recall referendum-, who did not pass through him or his cabinet. President Maduro cannot be accused of "violating constitutional rights" because the violation was made by the MUD during thecollection of 1% of the firms and the decision to repair these defects did not part from the National Executive, respecting the boundaries and functions of different instances of public power.
Judicial measures that seek to repair the damage committed during the irregular collection of 1% of the signatures to trigger a recall referendum, are independent of President Nicolás Maduro and the Executive.
Henry Ramos ended with the hopes of impeachment
The international press clung to what interested it the most -the bombastic headline- and skilfully omitted what the president of the AN, Henry Ramos had said.
During his turn to speak, he took the opportunity to verbally attack the Venezuelan military institutions and Minister for Defense, Vladimir Padrino Lopez, Henry Ramos explained that the assessment of the presidential situation (abandonment of office and political responsibility) that initiated yesterday was just that: an evaluation.
The president of the National Assembly said that after the special committee would share its findings, the NA would assess again whether the Supreme Court should be consulted on the merit of a process of impeachment against President Nicolás Maduro.
That is, Henry Ramos himself said that the implementation of this mechanism does not depend on the NA, but on a power that is not under its sphere of influence.
The NA can not purge the authorities, so the way to approach a political trial in accordance with the law is more troublesome
Henry Ramos, “not meaning to say it but saying it”, disclosed completely an open secret: Impeachment is a botch-up and a legal fraud. They try to replicate the same format of the parliamentary coup in Brazil, but without being in Brazil or having Dilma Rousseff as an adversary.
Beyond the legal reasons, are the political motivations. Since 1989, politics are not defined in halls, palaces and conclaves of sages, but in the streets and with the people. Representative politics fell off their stools and altars, and 27 years after they have failed to climb up to sit on them again. That is where the last word of political fact is said and where the chavism knows how to play better, how to move, because it arises precisely from those depths. When we say that this is not Brazil, Honduras or Paraguay, is not only because of the institutional strength of the Venezuelan state to preserve itself against the continued coup of antichavism, but due to the conditions and traits that define us as political people: we do not let ourselves to be blackmailed by experts, technocrats and dandys.
Keep on trying.