TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT POLITICAL CHANGE IN VENEZUELA (1999-2009)
The call for a Constitutional Amendment process, recently made by President Hugo Chávez allows a number of considerations that are located both in the field of Constitutional Law and the Political Philosophy. For Constitutional Law, as the Constitution adopted in December 1999 is located in the so-called New Latin American constitutionalism, which considers the need to increase opportunities for political participation, and take the Constitution as a legal body is not static, not perfect, more well understood as a dynamic institutional setting where collective of law can participate and articulate answers, and legal adjustments necessary. This new constitutionalism differs from classical models in the form and content of the Constitutions. Of Venezuela, Colombia, the proposal approved in Bolivia and Ecuador, incorporating direct democracy as the referendum, in its various forms, but beyond that bear or incorporate in its structure that allows for modification items, second also differences by the fact that its articles are less general and more specific in addressing the issue of social, political and economic aspect which contrasts with the Classic Constitutionalism - Under which is written by the general body of laws in France, Germany and the U.S., which raises a more general perspective of rights.
This difference is not accidental or casuistry. Classic Constitutionalism For this generalization facilitates, promotes and encourages a significant general process of exploitation of man by man and, moreover, holds a hegemonic apparatus which builds and strengthens the rule. For its part, the new constitutionalism emphasizes the need to understand one thing or moment that occurs when a constituent assembly is proposed to generate a new constitution and also, not necessarily a long period, could have changed the conditions historical and political, so it is necessary to profound modifications (Constituent Assembly), partial (Reform) or specific (Amendment) of any legal aspect.
From the standpoint of political philosophy, the proposed amendment also allows for other socio-political considerations. In this sense we must consider establishing a discussion of concepts such as political stability, governance and participation. We discussed the political stability, as there are sectors that point - located in the Classic Constitutionalism constitutional adjustments, which are processes that "altering" public peace and translated in tacit recognition. We discuss the issue of governance, it is thought that new additions for expanding the rights, increase the demands of citizens and this increases the possibility of social conflict. We discuss the issue of participation, for the amendment - as outlined, means that the last stage for enactment is exercised by the citizen himself and this increases the opportunities for discussion. Anyway, in regard to stability and governance, the positions taken by political actors outlines are extremely conservative attitudes in the wrong way with the political approach of the new constitutionalism. There
doubt that the Amendment process differs markedly from the reform process. Proposed in the year 2007 implemented significant changes in various aspects of the body of law adopted in 1999 without touching the core principles that characterize it. The Amendment is very specific, is to broaden the possibilities of participating in the election of officers of public performance and again, you enter a discussion on politically very important. First, we discuss the issue of rotation. In traditional and conservative views of politics, the rotation is defined as the possibility of replacement of a political actor on the other, with preferences different ideological, political philosophy less static alternation is seen as a process of open competition for the occupation of a position of public responsibility. Between one and another position is a great distance. In the case of the first definition, the rotation is defined as the succession of a political group by another. In the case of the second, the rotation is seen as an electoral competition and policy regarding citizen preferences for occupation of public office. In short, the alternation is given today by the conditions that ensure that any person or political organization can access the aspiration public office. In this regard, the Amendment does not alter the concept of rotation. In fact remains the figure of the referendum which ensures the rotation policy.
Another myth arisen around the reform is that the unrestricted application of candidates for public office involves closing the possibility of generational replacement. Those who say it shows an ignorance about the reality of government policy. It is known from many theoretical research by political science as O Donell, Sartori, Bobbio, Pzworsky, including the continued exercise of power translates into a significant political erosion which leaves open the replacement as soon as produces a loss in the preferences of the electorate on the ground that are not met its demands. That was demonstrated in the English parliamentary democracies such as Felipe González was replaced, or in England when Margaret Tatchert was replaced or when Francois Mitterrand in France lost the hegemony it had exercised. In all these cases arose alternate forces who was governed and represented an alternative to political hegemony. Therefore, in the specific case of Venezuela's democracy remains open the possibility of replacing those who hold positions of public representation as the recall referendum mechanism is still important for balance political.
The amendment has also served to discuss the possibility of introducing innovations in presidential political systems. There is no doubt that the nomination without limits is a feature of political systems are parliamentary and presidential systems that incorporate it, but this does not mean that it is not possible. Precisely this amendment introduces the theme of institutional change in political systems as an emergency of new constitutionalism. We must not forget that in world history there have been discussions about political change. I can not fail to note that when Thomas Hobbes spoke in his "Leviathan of the construction of a contract social between civil society and the ruling was considered absurd in the absolute climate of governance that prevailed, as happened with the Social Contract Rousseau raised the possibility of exercising civic responsibility. In short the fact that arises in a presidential system should be no limit on the application opens a space for the drive around to good governance is an array of opinion that makes a decision to change or retention election. That fact would have great weight in the structure of political systems in Latin America and certainly the most conservative sectors understand the political implications it can have on an area like ours where the prevailing leftist governments closer to the interests and perspectives of social groups.
The amendment is therefore a multiple space of creation. Multiple it broadens the field of political participation, as it introduces multiple new features in the structure and functioning of political systems. This moves away from those who assume that political change is dangerous for "political stability". Who indeed is what they do to indicate their grave concern about an increase in citizen participation. In this sense, the political campaign of those proposing the amendment must cease to be political propaganda that says nothing. I mean, should not make the mistake that took office in November last year it took the slogan Come with Everything, that slogan did not make any difference ideological opponents of the proposal of the PSUV. In the present case is key to emphasize the expansion of rights, to not disturb the rotation and especially the incorporation and adaptation of new constitutionalism in the change process. And to do this is to differentiate between propaganda and political communication. The propaganda drive the same elements of commercial marketing that characterizes capitalism while communication policy should be structured on high-impact cultural meanings that encourage participation. I can not conclude without noting that these considerations it seems that later rather than sooner we will lead a new process of Constituent Assembly (ANC) since the dynamics of change that have been generated in Venezuela are so great that in many cases articles of the Constitution of 1999 did not reach the magnitude of the expectations and needs of social groups. In that sense, at any given time - given the dynamism of democracy, will end in a need to adapt to change and this process is only a new step in that direction. Dr. John E.
Romero
historian and University Professor 10/01/2009
Juane1208@gmail.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment