Frustraciones y mas frustraciones
Venezuela

Kafka in Caracas

Feb 26th 2004 | CARACAS
From The Economist print edition



Chavez frustrates the petitioners

TIME was when Latin American rulers would lose an election but still
manage to win it during the vote count. But it is a novelty for a vote
to be stolen before it has even been scheduled. According to Venezuela
's opposition, that is just what the country's increasingly
authoritarian president, Hugo Chavez, is trying to do with a recall
referendum which--if it ever happens--could bring his populist
government to an abrupt end.

Ironically, Mr Chavez was once a great enthusiast for the idea of recall
referendums, an innovation in a new constitution he sponsored in 1999.
No longer. The electoral council (CNE) was slow to issue rules for
referendums, so two previous opposition attempts were ruled invalid.
Last year, the CNE finally drew up guidelines; these have been followed
by the Democratic Co-ordinator, the opposition umbrella group.


On four days late last year, the Co-ordinator gathered over 3m
signatures calling for the plebiscite. The CNE's rules were so strict
that, for example, petition forms were printed on bank security paper to
avoid fraud. The signature-gathering went smoothly, witnessed by
officials from the government, the opposition and the CNE.

But on day three, when it became clear that the number of signatures
would easily exceed the 2.4m (20% of the electorate) required, Mr Chavez
denounced the exercise as a "mega-fraud". If the CNE called the
referendum, he would not recognise it.

But the president then backtracked, saying he would respect the
council's decision and calling on the opposition to do the same. Why?
Perhaps because the CNE's board, three of whose five members appear to
support the government, is itself throwing up obstacles. It is already a
month late in ruling on whether a referendum should take place. And it
has been making up new rules as it goes along.

On February 24th, the CNE ruled that signatures will be annulled if the
accompanying personal details were penned by another hand (eg, if they
were taken down by the referendum organisers)--unless the signatories
individually confirm during a five-day period that they really did sign.
That should be enough to abort the referendum.

The Organisation of American States (OAS), which has observed the
process, is said to have discussed pulling out if what it has called
"excessive technicalities" take precedence over the will of the
electorate. It is no mere onlooker. Together with the Carter Centre,
headed by Jimmy Carter, a former American president, it did much to
persuade the opposition to take the referendum route (despite its fears
that Mr Chavez would bend the rules). Both are guarantors of a deal
struck in May 2003 in which government and opposition agreed to abide by
the constitution. "No tricks!", warned Mr Carter at the time.

Absent a referendum, many would argue that Mr Chavez was no longer
ruling as a democrat. Venezuela would risk expulsion from the OAS for
violating its Democratic Charter. That decision might be closely fought.
Mr Chavez would hope for many votes from the small states of the
English-speaking Caribbean , to whom he supplies cheap oil. He recently
visited neighbouring Guyana , where he downplayed Venezuela 's claim to
that country's Essequibo territory. A sudden about-turn aimed at
forestalling diplomatic isolation, said opponents. But if forced to
choose between isolation and power, Mr Chavez might prefer to walk alone.