• Live
    • Audio Only
  • google plus
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • A session of Venezuela's legislature, temporarily disqualified for disregarding the Supreme Court, has approved discussion of Maduro's theoretical removal from office.

    A session of Venezuela's legislature, temporarily disqualified for disregarding the Supreme Court, has approved discussion of Maduro's theoretical removal from office. | Photo: Reuters

Published 19 April 2018
The conspiracy of siege against Venezuela in its judicial variant increasingly seems to be moving towards completion, writes Mision Verdad.

A session of Venezuela's legislature, temporarily disqualified for its disregard of the Supreme Court of Justice, has approved consideration and discussion of the theoretical issue of President Nicolas Maduro's forced removal from office.

Where the International Front Against Venezuela Is Heading

This decision follows the opening of a trial of President Maduro by the so-called 'Supreme Court in Exile,' a group of Venezuelan lawyers named by the disqualified legislature as 'magistrate' acting in an illegal, parallel way out of Colombia.

This is an event unprecedented in Venezuelan and world politics from a judicial and institutional point of view. Such an unusual event only makes sense as part of the political siege, supported and promoted by the United States, to which Venezuela and its national authorities have been subjected.

The Fundamental Aim of the 'Trial'

The move by the 'Supreme Court in Exile' towards notionally removing Maduro and issuing an arrest warrant is prompted by and for international bodies self-evidently controlled by the United States government, such as Interpol. The announcement clearly implies the useless nature of such an order in Venezuela, given its irregularities and obvious constitutional violations coming from an illegal body outside Venezuelan territory with no right of defense for Maduro.

Even so, designed by overseas players, this strategy was launched as an overbearing step towards the creation of a judicial case against Maduro, which has legitimacy for the Venezuelan opposition living abroad, given its clear sponsorship by the Organization of American States in the person of Luis Almagro, supported by U.S. Senator Marco Rubio, both key players in the regime-change operation against Venezuela.

Prepared for this move and after the decision of the 'Supreme Court in Exile,' Venezuela's legislature had avoided this debate until April 17. Then a session was held with the required quorum, involving 107 deputies: fewer than the 112 out of 167 seats required for a qualified majority. The debate developed with some surprising changes of position and divided between the opposition parties that said valid conditions for such a 'trial' of President Maduro did not exist and those who vehemently support the 'adventure' of breaking Venezuela's laws.

In the end, the debate deferred a final decision pending a new debate within the week, thus giving life and continuity to the 'pre-trial.' With 107 deputies, following the incorporation of two from the Great Patriotic Pole, National Assembly President Omar Barboza announced that the proposal had sufficient merit. He authorized the spurious legal process to continue against President Maduro in relation to the Odebrecht case, based on accusations by the outlaw fugitive ex-Attorney General Luisa Ortega Diaz, that he engaged in corruption, extortion and conspiracy.

Foreign Actors in Control

Although the anti-Chavista deputies state that this action will have no effect inside Venezuela, they have made clear that it's the foreign anti-Chavista forces that are applying pressure to keep it going.

It's worth noting the context for this move, which is defined by a new emphasis in the system of U.S. foreign policy, blatantly applying pressure simultaneously on every front, especially in Venezuela's case, imposing sanctions and political, economic and diplomatic pressure. So the 'trial' of President Maduro is being made to look like a mechanism 'by Venezuelan institutions' to legitimize coercive measures already underway and other measures that are on the way.

One has to emphasize the pressure brought to bear by overseas anti-Chavista figures on legislators in Venezuela to carry out the decision of the illegal 'Supreme Court in Exile.' Julio Borges and Antonio Ledezma are the main lobbyists and promoters of the sanctions against their country and fulfill a role legitimizing the decisions cooked up in U.S. institutional offices. Ledezma figures as a likely 'president-in-exile' if the National Assembly goes ahead with the planned removal of President Maduro.

The danger of this move necessarily recalls other contexts. The creation of parallel institutions and baseless withdrawal of recognition of political leaders still in office are the fundamental components of conspiracies leading to war. Or at least they were in Libya, when three parallel factions to Muammar al Gaddhafi disputed power, both from exile and on Libyan soil.

Venezuela, Spain Agree to Normalize Diplomatic Ties

The danger of illegal international moves against President Maduro, 'legitimized' by instances outside Venezuela, would set a disturbing precedent given the growing judicialization of politics in Latin America.

Institutional harassment is increasing of left-wing leaders such as Lula da Silva, Cristina Fernandez and now Rafael Correa, and is another component of the de facto interruption of politics. The unprecedented aspect of the move against President Maduro is the enactment of an 'international trial' without the relevant bodies authorized to hold one, and that 'courts in exile' may try to remove him from office. The precedent is absurd, but of enormous significance as a variant of the judicialization of politics, this time in its overseas version.

Knowing that Maduro may well win the presidential elections of May 20, and given the limited room for maneuver of the Western powers to convince the region to follow the route of total diplomatic and financial boycott, the ruse of the 'Supreme Court in Exile' could give the U.S. government an opportunity to increase pressure on Venezuela. This would raise the case in international forums such as the U.N. Security Council as if it were a 'failed state' and fabricating a climate of non-recognition of Venezuela's institutions in the region, so as to develop the U.S. plan of 'humanitarian intervention.'

Diplomacy Abandoned

More and more U.S. foreign policy is abandoning diplomatic courtesy and appearances. In Latin America there is a clear rupture of institutional frameworks encouraged by the U.S. government's current foreign policy; even the self same institutional frameworks the United States helped to create are being undermined. How things get done no longer matters. Politics get suspended and rendered meaningless.

The barefaced abandonment of the forms and mechanisms of the OAS so as to coerce Venezuela has accelerated since 2014, when OAS Secretary General Luis Almagro sought to push though the application against Venezuela of the OAS Democratic Charter. That tendency has brought about and only made stronger what we are witnessing today. It is taking on the most sinister tonalities, only serving to deepen the creation of a framework of instability at a regional level.

It seems less and less relevant that the 'trial' of Maduro is illegal and supremely inconsistent. The conspiracy of siege against Venezuela in its judicial variant increasingly seems to be moving towards completion.

Post with no comments.