Queen Mattress Cargo Van

Press

The Red Defense Constitution expresses its strongest protest against the measures taken by CONATEL against civil organizations CEDICE Asoesfuerzo and who have been spreading in various radio and television stations, a advertising campaign called " In Defense of the Right to Private Property " showing some evidence and criteria that seek to highlight and protect certain attributes of the right private property, as well as any public policy question that can ignore this right.

Following the disclosure of these ads, CONATEL has initiated a punitive procedure against these organizations and the media that broadcast, claiming that they could be inciting to crime, public order disturbances and be attacking security the nation. The procedure not only aims to impose meaningful sanctions, but also seeks to silence legitimate messages, peaceful and necessary in a democratic and pluralistic society, to the extent that the only initiation, issued CONATEL a precautionary measure arbitrary and without justification, through which imposes prior censorship by prohibiting the disclosure of such advertising, and any other similar, while a proceeding is pending.

CONATEL

These measures constitute a flagrant violation of the right to freedom of expression and information enshrined in Articles 57 and 58 the Constitution and Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits specifically the establishment of censorship, why can not prohibit the broadcast of a message, but there is a final decision. At the same time, with this arbitrary measure will not only prevent these organizations to spread their ideas, but also deprives the Venezuelan society to receive and weigh these messages, which in any way incite violence or public disorder. This prevents that is the very society that is convinced, without government interference, the benefits or harm of certain public policies.

Also, this measure prior censorship threatens the very essence of a democratic society, because it imposes the need to tolerate a diversity of ideas and dissenting opinions, especially when they are justified and framed in explicitly recognized norms and values by the Constitution. For It is therefore logical and appropriate that there is scope to open a broad debate on issues of public interest, which excludes the possibility of banning the dissemination of ideas that are uncomfortable and even offensive to the government.

The inaccuracies or exaggerations that the government attributes to the messages that have been spreading these civil society organizations must be fought with ideas, not with clamps or procedures to inhibit public debate. Silence an opinion in an unreal and nonexistent danger of disorderly conduct is an intolerable restriction on the free expression of thought, menos en una sociedad democrática.

Además, es claro que el solo inicio de estos procedimientos genera un efecto inhibitorio en el resto de la sociedad, lo que se traduce en una autocensura, pues es lógico pensar que muchas personas u organizaciones se verán cohibidas de expresar sus ideas y opiniones, frente a la posibilidad de ser sancionados o perseguidos por entes gubernamentales.

Hacemos un llamado a las autoridades y tribunales competentes, a los fines de que den preferencia a los valores constitucionales que promueve el derecho a la libertad de expresión, y en consecuencia se deje sin efecto cualquier mecanismo directo o indirecto de censura previa, que pretenda inhibir el libre debate de ideas.

Rafael Chavero

Professor

UCAB

Jesús María Casal

Dean, Faculty of Law UCAB

Jose Roman Duque Corredor

President Academy of Political and Social Sciences