Venezuela: If At First You Don’t Succeed, Null The Election
Author: The Arcadia Foundation
Posted: February 25, 2010 16:24 PM
Rule of law is hardly adhered to in Venezuela, nor is democracy, for that matter – casualties of the revolution our favorite erratic autocrat repeatedly claims is on the rise. Judges who rule against the favor of the government’s wishes have been known to be thrown in jail themselves. Those in the executive cabinet that choose to speak out against the administration might wind up behind bars on trumped up charges so ostentatiously fabricated, it would be hilarious if not so sad. And mayor-elects might just not make it to mayor – that is, if they too oppose the powers that be.
It is in this light that the latest electoral news hit the wires – Venezuela’s highest court on Wednesday annulled the election of an opposition mayor, replacing him with a supporter of President Hugo Chavez until a new vote is held.
The Supreme Court threw out the 2008 election of Jorge Barboza, mayor of the Sucre municipality in western Zulia state, on grounds that he failed to pay $292 in local taxes.
The justices ruled Barboza was ineligible to continue as mayor because he lacked “the suitability (required) for the management of a mayoral post.”
In brief comments on the local Globovision television channel, Barboza called the ruling a coup against a democratically elected official and denied any wrongdoing.
His brother, Omar Barboza, said the arguments behind the ruling “constitute proof that the justice system is being used to politically persecute opponents” of Chavez’s socialist government.
Barboza said the owner of a house rented by the mayor apparently failed to pay the $292 in taxes. He called the court’s ruling ridiculous, saying his brother should not be held responsible for the home owner’s lack of responsibility.
The Supreme Court appointed Humberto Franka Salas, a member of Chavez’s ruling party, as interim mayor. Franka Salas, who was runner-up in the 2008 mayoral vote, will hold the post until a new election.
Chavez foes have long accused the president of using judges and prosecutors to bring trumped up criminal charges against government opponents. International rights groups have criticized the lack of independence of Venezuela’s judiciary, noting that Chavez appears to hold sway over the system.
The Organisation of American States (OAS) recently accused Chávez of endangering democracy, intimidating opponents and curbing freedom of speech in Venezuela.
In a 319-page report published this week, the body’s human rights branch – the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights – painted an alarming picture of repression and intolerance in Venezuela.
“The commission finds that the state’s punitive power is being used to intimidate or punish people on account of their political opinions,” it said. “Venezuela lacks the conditions necessary for human rights defenders and journalists to carry out their work freely.”
The report went on to document the “troubling trend” of harassment, violence and judicial action to deter and criminalise protests, leaving Venezuelans cowed.
It detailed cases of dozens of judges who were sacked or sidelined for issuing rulings the government did not like. “The lack of judicial independence and autonomy vis-á-vis political power is one of the weakest points in Venezuelan democracy.”
Chavez rejects the allegations, saying he has never pressured judges or prosecutors to target his adversaries.