Chavez backtracks on Venezuela spy law

[Judi Lynn]

Chavez backtracks on Venezuela spy law
1 hour ago

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — President Hugo Chavez says his government will rewrite a new intelligence law to calm Venezuelan fears that the decree could be used to stifle dissent.

Many Venezuelans were alarmed that the law could force them to spy on neighbors or risk prison terms.

Human rights activists and representatives of Venezuela's Catholic Church have criticized the decree, saying it violates civil liberties.

Chavez on Saturday said his government would remove a clause in the law that requires citizens to act as informants if authorities believe they have information on national security threats — or face up to four years in prison for refusing.

Chavez said the revised decree would protect civil rights.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VENEZUELA_SPY_LAW?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2008-06-07-17-22-52

[Bacchus39]

1. yep, those who criticized the spying measures were correct

as oppposed to those who think ANYTHING Chavez does is correct.

[magbana]

2. Regarding Chavez' "Backtrack" on Intelligence Law , , ,

this is exactly what a real leader does -- listen to the people. This is definitely what democracy looks like!

[Bacchus39]

3. better than spying on your neighbors for sure

who said this?

"I guess US infiltration in intelligence services in Ecuador was . . .
a warning signal and luckily Chavez is taking precautions in Venezuela."


support him when he proposes a dumb law, support him when he retracts it. why not take a critical look at the positions instead of blind support of the person?

[magbana]

4. Tsk, Tsk Bacchus . . .

A little testy today, eh?

[Bacchus39]

6. quite amused actually, at all the backtracking going on today

keep it coming!!!

[EFerrari]

8. Hey, I finally found the link to that book about our government

disappearing people -- asserting the right to pick up anyone for any reason at any time after 9/11. It's here:



http://www.amazon.com/Americas-Disappeared-Secret-Imprisonment-Detainees/dp/1583226451/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213115999&sr=1-1

And here is a blub about the main attorney who worked / supervised these cases:

Barbara Olshansky '85: Public Interest Lawyer of the Year
By David McKay Wilson


Barbara Olshansky '85 won the biggest case of her legal career when the U.S. Supreme Court in 2004 ruled that detainees at the U.S. facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, could challenge their incarceration in federal court. Rasul v. Bush, which The New York Times hailed as "the most important civil liberties case in half a century," reined in presidential power in prosecuting the war on terror.

But more than a year later, despite help from hundreds of pro bono lawyers working under Olshansky's oversight, not one habeas corpus petition has been heard in federal court. Having lost on the habeas corpus issue, the U.S. Department of Justice is now arguing that "enemy combatants" simply have no rights to enforce. Worse, the Supreme Court's ruling may be negated as a practical matter if the Graham-Levin amendment, a measure limiting detainees' rights which passed the Senate in late November, becomes law. "I feel like I'm arguing Rasul all over again," said Olshansky, deputy legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York City.

The Rasul ruling thrust Olshansky onto the international stage as the lead lawyer of the defining case in post–September 11 America. It's her first major national security battle in a career that has spanned such specialties as the environment, health care, racial discrimination, and prisoners' rights.

In honor of her work, Olshansky was named 2005 Public Interest Lawyer of the Year by the Stanford Public Interest Law Foundation at a November 9 dinner on Stanford's campus. The two previous winners were Anthony Romero '90, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, and Peter Bouckaert '97, a senior emergencies researcher at Human Rights Watch. "The work of people like Barbara Olshansky is ultimately work that holds up a mirror to us and makes us confront ourselves," said Larry Kramer, Richard E. Lang Professor of Law and Dean. "It's people like Barbara who force us to be our best selves."

http://www.law.stanford.edu/publications/stanford_lawyer/issues/74/LawyeroftheYear.html

[magbana]

5. BOREV Weighs In

Hey Can We Do this with the Patriot Act, Please?

You may have heard that Venezuela recently re-vamped its intelligence apparatus. Actually what you probably heard is that a New Spy Law threatened to throw Venezuelans into prison if they didn't spy on their neighbors just like in Cuba! That was sort of the gist of this hysterical front page New York Times story last week. The Economist, hilariously backtracking on years of hyperventilating over Castro-comunismo in Venezuela, actually noted that the Chavez administration had "never been particularly repressive, let alone a dictatorship." Until now, that is! The law was going to turn the country into a police state once and for all. It was even drawing comparisons to the Patriot Act, for gawdsakes.

Except that it didn't quite do that. The law, as originally written, required people to turn over information about terrorism or threats to national security, but even that is moot because the government declared yesterday that it would amend it to remove the passages deemed controversial by human rights groups. Lamest. Dictatorship. Ever.

http://www.borev.net/2008/06/hey_can_we_do_this_with_the_pa.html

http://snipurl.com/2elnq

[Judi Lynn]

7. Chavez Revising, Not Revoking Venezuela's New Intelligence Law

Chavez Revising, Not Revoking Venezuela's New Intelligence Law
June 10, 2008
By Stephen Lendman

Over the weekend, Chavez showed his mettle as a democratic leader. He acknowledged "errors" in the newly enacted Law on Intelligence and Counterintelligence and will fix them to assure it fully complies with Venezuela's Constitution.

He gave examples and cited Article 16 that cites the possibility of prison terms for persons not cooperating with intelligence services. It's a "mistake," said Chavez and "not a small (one)." The new intelligence services won't oblige anyone to inform on others. Doing so is "overstepping," and "I assume responsibility" for the error and will fix it.

He continued: "Where we make mistakes, we must accept this and not defend the indefensible....I guarantee to the country, in Venezuela (this law will assault) no one! And no one will be obliged to say more than they want to say....(We) will never attack the freedom of Venezuelans, independently of their political positions. Liberty....is one of the slogans of our socialism."

Other articles will also be amended:

-- Article 19 prohibiting non-state agencies from using spy technologies;

-- Article 20 regarding search and wiretap provisions; and

-- Article 21 regarding secret evidence.

The new law will be reviewed in its entirety. Whatever is potentially unconstitutional will be removed or amended. Chavez guarantees it. He's a man of his word, but the corporate media took full advantage of the moment to jump all over him. As usual, The New York Times' Simon Romero led the assault.

He headlined: "Chavez Suffers Military and Policy Setbacks" with the front end of his lead referring to Colombia's (unsubstantiated) claim about capturing a Venezuelan national guard officer carrying assault rifles "believed to be intended for leftist guerrillas."

Once again Romero fumbles with the facts as he always does on Venezuela. He now states: "President Hugo Chavez....said Saturday he would 'withdraw' a decree overhauling intelligence policies that he had made earlier that week." He called it "a rare act of self-criticism" while hammering on the "capture" issue and filling paragraphs with inaccuracies.

More:
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/17883