Statement of the Venezuelan Association of Constitutional Law lawyers In the last decades of the last century was raised with increasing force, first the possibility and then the need to produce a constitutional change. Various were the proposals offered, was a national debate framed in another that was taking place throughout Latin America on the reforms of the state and republican institutions, in many cases to save democracy, ours to strengthen it. This dynamic of the century culminated in the convening of a National Constituent Assembly in 1999, the product of the Constitution it is force.
While our Constitution is not itself the product of a consensus or a conclusion, it expresses the spirit and the spirit of reform that inspired the debate, both driven COPRE late last century, like the was developed on the occasion of the first discussion in Constituent National Assembly in 1999, and collected and expressed in its content interests and aspirations of various sectors of Venezuelan society who sought institutional change, although there was no consensus, it is a blended formula, expression of a certain understanding, and agreed not systematic, hence the contradictions noted in the text.
's not like some raised, at the time, "a suit made to measure", an instrument created by a sector with hegemonic pretensions to impose on the Venezuelan political regime. It is a legitimate Constitution (with its strengths and weaknesses), approved in a referendum by the Venezuelan people. It is the ultimate rule of the game, or rather, the maximum regulatory instrument for the democratic Venezuela in the current context. As a policy letter is the epitome of the great formal rules of the game. And according to his own text, "... the supreme law and the legal basis ..." and under that Article 7 "... all persons and bodies exercising public powers are subject ... "she
Ours, like any constitution, faces a dilemma, both in the ways in fact of formal the Constitution and the Constitution real, the problem of its validity contradictory formal and real life. But also now faces the contradiction between political system and constitution, in a context of threat to the survival of republican institutions for democracy. Threat expressed in linear form at times, so ambiguous in other, often contradictory ways, guided by a peculiar concept of legality attributed totalitarian regimes by experts, always presented with a rhetorical veil that identifies itself as a revolutionary. Anyway, looks increasingly deplorable development undemocratic practices daily with a democratic constitution.
What initially observed in developing legislation inconsistent with the Constitution, as was the case with laws relating to decentralization and decentralized federal state (FIDES, ESAA, Ports, etc.) Or with failure of the attempt to pass the law of state treasuries, vetoed by the President of the Republic , is expressed more clearly, later in the text of the president's proposal for constitutional reform, augmented by the National Assembly and unproved by the people in referendum in December 2007. Has been approved, it would indeed be "a tailored suit." The force, with its imperfections, is a constitution for a democratic development in a pluralistic environment.
The history of this first decade of the century, reveals a process of concentration of political power which is not enough the current Constitution, it is considered that she already fulfilled its role. Not possible to reform, has been expressly and openly violated, using already mentioned the peculiar way of thinking about law that makes public authorities focused on a single command, interpret, as it has National Assembly and the Supreme Court, that "if you can a way nothing can prevent other "just this simple logic allows for the adoption of the famous 26 decrees with the force of law, the approval of the amendment, and the current passing laws in flagrant contradiction with the Constitution, and even Contrary to what the people decide, in exercise of sovereignty in a referendum act. It is worth remembering that the Case the Supreme Court of Justice in Political Chamber Management in 1999, which gave legitimacy to the floor call National Constituent Assembly, referred to the limitation that the powers that be to amend the Constitution today is acting contrary to this historic decision, power has been formed above the sovereign. And in accordance with Article 333 of the Constitution, the "... Constitution does not lose validity ... because or repeal in any manner other than as provided for therein," so that defense requires the observance of the Constitution , to has led the call for this act, and what is the duty of every citizen of Venezuela.
is why the Venezuelan Association of Constitutional Law is present in the civic and civil act, and will monitor, within the framework of the academic nature that governs it, you do not intend going to the force, both formal and real, of our Constitution, and pursuant to an express civic duty with a sense of pluralism, his opinion.
0 comments:
Post a Comment