Reply #51: Those feathers are probably poking out of your back even now.

[MADem]

He's already packed the legislature, like BushCo did during the Frist years. And they're doing his "Que Viva Chavezuela!" bidding. The crap he's pulling makes BushCo look like rank amateurs.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/10/18/venezuela.amendments/

How long would you put up with this SHIT in the US? We only do this kind of crap to "furriners!!"

...(The Constitutional) amendment, if approved, would allow President Chavez to invoke a state of emergency to justify suspending certain rights that are untouchable under international law," Vivanco said.

These include the presumption of innocence and rights to a fair trial, to an attorney, against self-incrimination, for a defendant to know the charges and evidence against him, and against double jeopardy, he said.

The proposed amendments would eliminate limitations on how long a state of emergency could last and the requirement that a constitutional tribunal review the suspension of rights during times of emergency, Vivanco said.

They also would get rid of language requiring that any such decree "meet the requirements, principles and guarantees established in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the American Convention on Human Rights," he said.

Advocates of the amendments have cited the ill-fated 2002 coup attempt against the socialist president as evidence of the need for constitutional reform.

But Vivanco disagreed. "Recent Latin American history shows that it is precisely during states of emergency that countries need strong judicial protections to prevent abuse," he said. "Otherwise, what has historically prevailed is the brutal exercise of power."

From the Lefty Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/venezuela/story/0,,2193346,00.html


As part of the same package of changes presidential term limits will be abolished, allowing Mr Chavez, who seldom seems to sleep or take time off, to continue his hyperactivity for some time to come.

Critics say the two proposals are directly related: the six-hour proposal is a populist sweetener to ease the constitution's passage in a December referendum which will give the president the right to stand for continuous re-election. They have also criticised a proposal to suspend due process in "emergencies", allowing citizens to be detained without charge.
Under the existing constitution the 53-year-old soldier-turned-president, first elected in 1998, is obliged to step down when his current term ends in 2012.

Opinion polls suggest the new charter, which the Chavista-dominated congress is due to vote through this month, will be endorsed in the referendum as the president is popular among the poor majority, although some remain sceptical.



This article is a beaut, it speaks from the perspective of both the supporters and opposition--a bit lengthy, but worth it: http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=45&ItemID=14258

On Sunday December 2, Venezuelans will return to the voting booths to ratify or reject two slates of constitutional reforms, 33 of which have been proposed by President Hugo Chávez and 36 additional reforms made by the National Assembly. Included in the proposed reforms to Venezuela’s 1999 constitution are an increase in the presidential term from six to seven years and a removal of the two-term limit, a shortening of the work week to 36 hours, the suppression of the right to information during national emergencies, the elimination of the autonomy of the central bank, increased funding for communal councils, the creation of new forms of collective property, the requirement of gender parity in positions of public office, and the recognition of Afro-Venezuelan groups, in addition to indigenous groups included in the previous reforms.

This mixed bag of proposed reforms has provoked polarized reactions across the country, and from international observers. The familiar cries of “dictadura” (dictatorship) coming from the opposition camp are no surprise, but the student protests coming out of the main public and private universities of Caracas, and the renegade voices within Chávez’s own administration have caused some confusion over where the fault lines lie. Some social movements supporting Chávez have been concerned that retrogressive proposals are mixed together with progressive reforms, making it difficult to campaign and vote on the issues as a bloc. What is at stake in Venezuela’s upcoming reform referendum? Does the outcry over the reforms signal yet again the frustrations of a thwarted opposition in its ongoing tussles with the government, or is there something more at play?

It is important to understand the anatomy of the various social forces who have thrown their hat into the ring. The long-term anti-Chavista camp, opposed to the proposed reforms, is divided over what strategy to take to the reform referendum. Some opposition parties, including Primero Justicia, Un Nuevo Tiempo, and the Christian Democratic COPEI have begun a campaign to encourage people to vote “No” to the reforms. By contrast, the National Resistance Command, which includes opposition parties such as Acción Democrática (AD), Alianza Bravo Pueblo and Bandera Roja called for a boycotting of the referendum and have mobilized people in the streets for their cause, although the AD retracted this position and joined the “No” campaign just a few days later. Like in earlier moments, the opposition’s indecisiveness and its inability to come to a united decision about how to confront Chávez has weakened its political impact.

In a surprising move, Chávez’s former Defense Minister Raul Isais Baduel who had played an important role in restoring Chávez to power during the 2002 coup, also came out against the constitutional reforms and urged people to vote “No” in the upcoming referendum. The former army commander described the changes as a “coup d’état” that would concentrate further power in the hands of the president, saying that there was no need to overhaul the 1999 constitution. Some were concerned that the defection of a senior military personnel could have an impact on the armed forces, but so far there is no indication that this should be the case. It also seems that Baduel’s opposition stems from his concerns over the proposed changes to Article 328, which would require changes to the structure of the Armed Forces.


.....As can be seen from the criticisms coming from social movements and commentators supportive of the Chávez government, it is possible and necessary to criticize the state’s attempts to monopolize power, not in the name of a procedural democracy, as the free-market proponents of the opposition would have it, but rather in the name of a substantive democracy that puts decision making power in the hands of people organized within communal councils, assemblies, and popular organizations. On this account, “participation” is not limited to campaigning and mobilizing people to vote in the recall referendum on articles that have already been decided by a small group of representatives. It aspires to a local level of decision making that would have people themselves determine the content of their laws and institutions.







The Shah did "land reform" to con the peasants. Hugo gives 'em a shorter work week in exchange for the opportunity to suspend the Constitution anytime he says "Emergency, Emergency, Everybody To Get From Street!!!" (The reference for that line is Alan Arkin in {i]The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming FWIW.)

You'll be able to fly to the top of the Rockefeller Center tree with those wings before they take it down this year! Bush could take lessons from the guy on "how it's done," but he waited too long--he doesn't have his rubber-stamp legislature like Hugo does, anymore.