Feb
18
2011
Posted by
admin
Comments

Inter-American Court of Human Rights to Decide if Venezuela Violated Political Rights

For 12 years now, the Venezuelan government has gradually and consistently launched attacks on the most basic tenants of democracy. Multiple international organizations have pointed the finger at Mr. Chávez for fostering a “precarious human rights situation” and dismantling the freedom of the press.  Apparently for “El Presidente,” his “21st Century Socialism” means government power that toes the line of dictatorship.

Adding to the long laundry list of violations that characterizes the Chávez administration is the government’s manipulation of the judiciary branch to persecute political opponents. That practice is being put to the test by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, based in San José, Costa Rica. The organization Democracy on Trial explains:

On March 1st- 2, 2011, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (the Court ) in San José, Costa Rica will hold a public hearing to decide whether or not the Venezuelan government arbitrarily disqualified opposition leader Leopoldo López from exercising his political rights.

López decided to appeal to the Inter-American Human Rights System (part of the Organization of American States, OAS) as the Venezuelan government had barred him politically and ignored allowable limits to political rights as enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights (the Convention).

The Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, pursuant to Article 23 of the Convention, establishes that political rights can only be suspended “by for a final and definitive criminal decision.” In other words, only those “convicted of a crime” may have their political rights restricted. López has neither gone to trial nor been convicted. In his view, political motivations are behind the unjust disqualification.

The outcome of the case before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has greater implications than just the potential reinstatement of López’s eligibility to run for office. Via Democracy on Trial:

This Court’s decision will be crucial for the future of democracy in the region and particularly in Venezuela. Approximately 300 other opposition political leaders–also disqualified by the Venezuelan State–stand to benefit from the result. In addition, the case would also set precedent throughout the hemisphere and prevent future use of political disqualification as a tool for persecution and restriction of political rights.

Below is a video that explains the case in detail:

For more information on this case, please visit http://democraciaenjuego.org/en/

 
Feb
15
2011
Posted by
admin
Comments

Venezuela’s Government Stranglehold

By Francisco Toro of CaracasChronicles

Venezuela’s increasingly restrictive foreign currency exchange control system is becoming a key instrument in the Chávez government’s bid to establish hegemonic control over Venezuelan society. By giving the government a stranglehold over the country’s economic life, currency controls have become a prime mechanism in crafting a new economic elite fully subservient to the governing clique.

Venezuela’s economy is uncommonly vulnerable to interference via currency controls. Of course, threatening long jail terms against those who sell foreign currency at market rates would be a strong tool for authoritarian control in any setting, but nowhere more so than in Venezuela’s “port economy” where most consumption goods are imported and paid for with the proceeds from oil exports.

In a country where, for instance, most staple foods are imported, giving the government the ability to decide who can and who can’t buy foreign currency, when and at what price, gives it unprecedentedly fine-grained control over who grows rich and who goes bust.

The reason is that Venezuela’s official exchange rate is extravagantly overvalued. According to economists the country’s “equilibrium exchange rate” – the rate at which the bolivar would likely settle if it was allowed to float freely against the dollar – is perhaps at twice the level of the official exchange rate.

Another way to say that is that the government deeply subsidizes the purchase of foreign currency, but only to the favored few.

And with the cut-rate dollars that only they can access, the favored few are able to import consumption goods and sell them on at prices that Venezuelan producers could never match. The result is a kind of backwards-dumping dynamic, where government policy systematically favors foreign-made goods over their Venezuelan counterparts.

One consequence of this is deindustrialization: the wholesale hollowing out of Venezuela’s light manufacturing base. Another is that favored importers – which includes the government’s own food distribution network – reap huge windfalls, while those without access to cheap, subsidized dollars languish.

It is lost on no one, of course, that political loyalty is the number one requirement for those obtaining those covetted cut-rate dollars, making the entire system a powerful mechanism to enforce political allegiance to the government on the part of a new class of crony importers.

Those without favored access to dollars – a category that includes all those so much as suspected of political independence – are forced instead into the now illegal “parallel market”: in effect, a black market where traders face lengthy jail sentences and heavy fines for helping others to finance  imports or save in hard currency.

The system criminalizes activities that would be routine throughout the rest of the region. Trying to save in foreign exchange is now a crime, as it is to take your gold jewelry with you on a trip and sell it for convertible currency abroad. Even citing the real (i.e., non-controlled) price of dollars in domestic currency is now a crime punishable with a fine worth up to Bs.55,000 – some $12,790 at the official rate, much less at the “Voldemort” rate. (It is, of course, illegal for me to tell you what the real going rate for dollars is.)

Illegal currency traders are nothing if not resourceful: they have set up and maintain anonymous websites to share reference prices, and communicate actively to keep the market operating.

Secure smartphones – particularly Blackberries – have become the tool of choice in enabling the market to operate. Still, insecurity runs deep: trading in this way is now technically punishable with up to 7 years in prison.

Of course, as with any illegal market, Venezuela’s unregulated currency market seems a magnet for organized crime. A market where contracts are not enforceable through the courts tends to turn into one where contracts are enforced through the barrel of a gun. Already, stories of drug traffickers turning to illegal bolivar trading as part of sophisticated money-laundering operations are widespread. Everyday people and legitimate businesses barred from the regulated currency control system are increasingly drawn into contact with these criminal elements merely to carry out the kinds of necessary trades that would be routine anywhere else in the hemisphere.

And, of course, by criminalizing the kinds of business transactions that legitimate businesses need to carry out routinely to remain in operation, the government could well arm itself for a broad crackdown on the private sector down the road.

With dozens of companies now technically in violation of Currency Control laws, much of Venezuela’s private sector has been forced into a semi-clandestine position, permanently one investigation away from shut-down and the arrest of its top executives.

Charges, if they do come, will be technically “correct” – in the same way the charges against Rosa Parks were technically “CORRECT” under Montgomery, Alabama’s existing ordinances on bus-ridership.

Keynes once famously wrote that “There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency.” Surely, no currency is more debauched than that which cannot be legally traded.

 
Feb
14
2011
Posted by
admin
Comments

Política exterior estadounidense y Latinoamérica:

La Sub-Comisión para Asuntos del Hemisferio Occidental de la Cámara de Representantes de los Estados Unidos y su presidente, Rep. Connie Mack (R-FL), realizarán una audiencia mañana, 15 de febrero, con el objetivo de evaluar la política exterior estadounidense hacia América Latina.  Arturo Valenzuela, Secretario de Estado Adjunto para Asuntos del Hemisferio Occidental y el diplomático de más alto rango en asuntos latinoamericanos,  será el testigo principal de la audiencia. (¿Tiene los Estados Unidos una política exterior para América Latina? Evaluando el impacto a los intereses norteamericanos y a los de sus aliados.)

Venezuela será probablemente uno de los temas de mayor atención durante esta audiencia. Los miembros del comité estarán interesados en saber sobre el estado de la democracia en Venezuela y el impacto que las políticas domésticas e internacionales de Hugo Chávez tiene sobre los intereses estadounidenses. Ya que aquí en What’s Next Venezuela, nosotros trabajamos el tema de Venezuela 24 horas al día los siete días de la semana, hemos decidido compartir con los miembros del comité algunas de las preguntas que pensamos se le deben hacer al Secretario de Estado Adjunto Valenzuela durante la audiencia.

  1. Existe evidencia que Venezuela ha asistido a miembros de la ETA y las FARC. Esto ha resultado en un llamado a que EE.UU. incluya a Venezuela en la lista de los estados que apoyan el terrorismo. ¿Cree usted que Venezuela debería ser designado como un país que auspicia el terrorismo? Preocupa a muchos que varios militares de alto rango en Venezuela están participando en el tráfico de drogas. Walid Makled, el presunto traficante de drogas venezolano detenido en Colombia y a quien los EE.UU. procura extraditar, ha dicho que así es. ¿Cree que el gobierno de Venezuela ayuda y sirve como cómplice del tráfico de drogas en la región?
  2. ¿Qué está haciendo el gobierno estadounidense para proteger a las compañías norteamericanas en Venezuela amenazadas por el gobierno de Chávez y su creciente ola de expropiaciones de propiedad privada?
  3. ¿Está haciendo algo el gobierno estadounidense para lograr compensación justa para las compañías norteamericanas como Owens-Illinois, ConocoPhillips, Helmerich & Paine y otras que han sido expropiadas y aún no han recibido restitución?
  4. ¿Cuáles son sus planes para manejar las crecientes amenazas a los intereses norteamericanos y a la industria privada en Venezuela?
  5. ¿Está nervioso el gobierno norteamericano por la estrecha relación entre el gobierno venezolano e Irán?
  6. ¿Cuándo piensa el gobierno nombrar al próximo embajador a Venezuela?
  7. ¿Está preocupado el gobierno con el reciente acuerdo entre Venezuela y Rusia que provee al gobierno del presidente Chávez asistencia nuclear?
  8. ¿Estaría el gobierno opuesto a que Venezuela busque poner en vigor un programa nuclear?
  9. ¿Cuáles son algunos de los desafíos que enfrenta el gobierno en lidiar con  Venezuela?
  10. ¿Cree que Venezuela se podría convertir en el próximo Egipto?
  11. La semana pasada, el Director de Inteligencia Nacional, James Clapper, le dijo a un comité del Congreso que el gobierno venezolano podría enfrentar más protestas por el empeoramiento de las condiciones económicas en el país. ¿Está de acuerdo?
  12. ¿Qué podemos esperar para Suramérica si Chávez gana las elecciones de 2012? En su opinión, ¿qué es lo próximo para Venezuela?