home | Archive | analysis | videos | data | weblog

news in other languages:
Editorials in English
Editorials in Spanish
Editorials in Italian
Editorials in German


The People of Venezuela versus Hugo Chavez

By Aleksander Boyd

London 14.01.04 – In the Anglo-American legal tradition there is a rule that has survived the pass of time. It is rather simple yet brutal; the best argument always wins. In most cases the judges do not consider who is right or who is wrong, they tend to overlook the intricacies of the issue. Furthermore they will hear only what is spoken of in the court, bothering not in investigating crucial and relevant information related to the case at hand. Their primary role being to act as umpires between two adversarial parties.

In most of Europe and countries where the function of the courts is one characterized by its inquisitorial nature, the judges do sometimes stick their noses into the thick of things [trying to establish which party is right according to law and statutes] in what constitutes a common practice in civil legal systems.

As most of the mainstream media of the world and the internet is dominated by Anglo-American interests such is the test that the international community applies when analyzing the crisis in Venezuela. Indeed loyal to its customs –it would be foolish to expect otherwise- the approach that has been taken by those whom make an envious living out of opining about other people’s conflicts and idiosyncrasies is that of the distant judge, not preoccupied with the “small print or the hidden issues.” When it comes to disputes, investigation is not part of their duties, culture or behavioural imprint but rather something left for scientist and members of academia.

In this case Hugo Chavez’ team of “advocates” have played for the judge and according to the rules of the prevailing system. They have come forth with the best arguments so far, which are to be repeated millions of times such as Mantras. These can be summarised as follows:

1. There was a selfish and utterly corrupt elite governing Venezuela, it was imperative to remove them.

2. The dispossessed were/are in such a state due to the savage ransacking of the country’s wealth by the oligarchs.

3. There is/has been a grave racial struggle between blacks and whites.

4. Hugo Chavez is desperately trying to bring great goods for the people and put the country back on its feet.

The opposition -misrepresenting the People- on the other hand is yet to find an articulate team of legal experts to represent them. They have not got the money, if they do they are not willing to spread it around Chavez’ style, they keep missing the point when it comes to the rules and most importantly they have not being heard by the judge; his political alter ego makes him deaf sometimes… Some of the arguments from that camp are:

1. Hugo Chavez and his collaborators are selfish and utterly corrupt.

2. Poverty, unemployment and crime are affecting an ever increasing number of citizens.

3. PDVSA has been destroyed and its staff illegally dismissed and mistreated.

4. Hugo Chavez must go.

The judge, henceforth a multifarious lot of individuals deeply disturbed by the reach of Capitalism are to be found in a court of law called “The International Media”, in its customary role as arbiter hears Chavez’ side constantly [he finds a striking similarity between himself and one of Chavez’ advocates, Venezuela’s Vice President that is]. As a matter of fact it is the only voice that one can hear in this court. Apart from the aforementioned arguments this party has also other occult and firm reasons to be confident; as the rule of precedent continues to shape most of the rulings from judges nowadays they rest assured that similar previous cases such as the People of Cuba v Fidel Castro, the People of Zimbabwe v Robert Mugabe or the People of Haiti v Jean-Bertrand Aristide will have a decisive bearing in the present case's final decision.

The rules of turns, each party shall have equal opportunity to present and defend its position, has not been respected accordingly. The judge cares not about who is right or wrong, he just wants to listen to the arguments. The opposition’s defenders have not shown up [no one knows who they are although the attention of the judge has been called upon a much disorganised group of housewives and solitary activists whom from the back of the courtroom seem desperate in denouncing Venezuela’s president every action], the paperwork required never arrived and the numerous leaders of the opposition do not seem capable of reaching an agreement as to how and which arguments need to be presented in order to put up a half decent fight for the People. Sadly they have no precedent to recourse to.

No point in this dispute is more important or relevant than human exploitation in the eyes of the judge for is an issue that must be swiftly eradicated regardless of its geographical location. Hugo Chavez is addressing the problem in the most efficient, feasible and humanitarian way –so his advocates affirm- thus the People of Venezuela have lost the case. The unmoved judge is convinced that the racial struggle argument wins the day.

send this article to a friend >>

Keep Vcrisis Online

top | printer friendly version | disclaimer