By Luis Manuel Aguana
It has caught my attention a lot and I don’t know what the origin of this new perspective is, but now it’s January 10, 2019 as the last day of Nicolás Maduro in power. And as always, I wonder in the same way as that character from the television of the 60s, Inspector Columbo: Who benefits? Besides, why not now and only after January 10, 2019? Has the situation of illegitimacy in power of the man who calls himself President of the Republic changed?
As far as we Venezuelans know, Nicolás Maduro Moros was declared out of office by the National Assembly on January 9, 2017. (http://www.asambleanacional.gob.ve/actos/_acuerdo-sobre-el-abandono-de-las-funciones-constitucionales-de-la-presidencia-de-la-republica), abandonment that was ratified in agreement of the same National Assembly on August 21, 2018 (http://www.asambleanacional.gob.ve/actos/_acuerdo-de-ratificacion-de-la-decision-de-la-asamblea-nacional-de-declarar-el-abandono-del-cargo-de-nicolas-maduro-moros-y-sobre-su-responsabilidad-penal-por-hechos-de-corrupcion-vinculados-a-la-empre), and which included, in its point No. 5, “To initiate, in order to effectively fill this power vacuum within the framework of the Constitution and the Treaties in force, the corresponding consultations with all sectors of Venezuelan society to promote a process of re-establishment of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, as mandated by articles 333 and 350 of the Constitution, and as reiterated in the popular consultation of July 16, 2017”.
And so? How is it that it is the 10E and not now? Not to mention that the National Assembly has not taken the first step since last August 21 to “Initiate…the consultations…to promote a process of re-establishment of the Constitution…”, as they themselves agreed to proceed with the change of government, the Venezuelans who are used to not reading the small letters of the contracts, we have not realized that as of that August 21 the National Assembly justified at the same time the presence of Nicolás Maduro in power, ignoring as “unconstitutional” the temporary separation of the position of Nicolás Maduro Moros, the main basis used by the legitimate Supreme Court of Justice for them to proceed with the designation of a transitional government according to a ruling dated July 2, 2018 (ver in Spanish, Judgment of the TSJ-L declaring the Absolute Fault in the Presidency of Venezuela and decree URGENCY to fill the power vacuum according to the Constitution of the Republic, in the official Twitter of the TSJ-L in https://twitter.com/TSJ_Legitimo/status/1014611587745886211).
Indeed, according to the conclusions of the opinion of the Legal Advisors of the Parliament, this one defended the human rights of Maduro (!) of separating him temporarily from his position:
“b.- The parliamentary majority of the National Assembly must be cautious with the invocation of article 380 of the COPP, since it must be coherent with positions previously assumed in accordance with the Constitution and in defense of human rights. Otherwise it would reduce the moral and juridical force of its decisions.
c.- If the aforementioned constitutional aspect were not taken into account, and it were accepted that Nicolás Maduro Moros has been suspended in the exercise of his functions based on article 380 of the Organic Code of Criminal Procedure, it would be a temporary fault and not absolute since according to the same provision it would be suspended “during the process”, that is to say, it depends on the result of the trial to become or not an absolute fault.
d.- The factual assumption referred to in the first part of article 233 of the Constitution occurs when the absolute absence of the President of the Republic occurs between his election and the taking of office, so this case is not about the factual assumption of the consequences of the application that the notified decision assigns to article 380 of the COPP” (see in Spanish, Conclusions of the Opinion of the Legal Consultancy on notification received from magistrates appointed by the NA, dated July 30, 2018, in http://www.asambleanacional.gob.ve/noticias/_dictamen-de-la-consultoria-juridica-sobre-notificacion-recibida-de-magistrados-designados-por-la-an).
Consequently, the Legal Advisors of the National Assembly rejected the temporary absence of Nicolás Maduro on July 30, 2018, indicating that the absolute absence is necessary for the Assembly to proceed with the designation of a new government, being very astutely dated before the sentence of the open trial of Nicolás Maduro Moros in Bogotá on August 15, 2018, but published on the same day of the Agreement, August 21, 2018.
What does all this mean? From the institutional point of view, the National Assembly, which has not moved a single finger to assert point No. 5 of the Agreement they made on August 21, 2018, still considers Maduro President of Venezuela until the conclusion of his mandate on January 10, 2019, rejecting the sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ-L) of July 2 because for them they have not received the formal motivated sentence (with evidence) that establishes in a reliable manner the Absolute Fault of the President, based on that opinion of the Legal Advisers.
That is why the twisted nature of this situation leads us to make errors of appreciation and to follow stories along the way, making something that we all want to get rid of now, the politicians of the Assembly manipulate it in order to extend Maduro’s mandate after the elections of December 9, 2018. That is the answer to Columbo’s question: Who benefits? The government and its opposition.
The legitimate TSJ has the transcendental mission for the future of the Nation to cut this situation immediately, publishing already the motivated and definitive sentence of Nicolás Maduro Moros where the proofs that lead to the Absolute Fault of the President are definitively established, and that oblige the politicians of the National Assembly to proceed immediately to a Transitional Government that puts an end to the regime of Nicolás Maduro without further delay. Once it is published, it must be formally officiated for the knowledge of the entire International Community. And that effect that would take place on January 10 would materialize at the moment after the formal notification of the sentence to all the governments of the world and to the international police.
And you may wonder why the legitimate Supreme Court has not proceeded with the publication of this sentence? For the same reason that the regime has been prevented from falling: many interests that resist the investigation of the corruption that opens with the evidence provided by the Prosecutor, and that involve many people of the regime and its opposition.
The sad thing about all this is that if Maduro’s reasoned sentence does not come out, and that it had to be published procedimentally in a maximum of two weeks after August 15, 2018, all the effort made by the legitimate TSJ in Bogotá to lock up Nicolás Maduro Moros for corruption, will crumble along with all the credit that the legitimate TSJ has deservedly won after its constitution in the OAS with the full backing of the International Community. Either it is the sentence or it is the 10E. Sentence versus 10E, what do you prefer? Personally, I prefer the sentence. That would be a good detonator for what would happen in Venezuela now, not on January 10 of next year…
Caracas, October 25, 2018