Constitutional Reform in Venezuela
On August 15th,
2007, President Chavez made headlines when he announced proposed reforms to the
Venezuelan Constitution during a speech to the National Assembly in
Caracas. The next day, a commission to
study the reforms was set up by the National Assembly and was declared in
permanent session. In the first
commission meeting, the President of the National Assembly, Cilia Flores, said
that all issues related to the constitutional reform would be addressed,
including the work plan and activity schedule of the National Assembly, as well
as “street parliaments” that are designed to allow the public to participate in
debates on the reforms.[1]
If approved, the reforms
would alter various sections of the 1999 Constitution, developed through a
Constituent Assembly shortly after President Chavez began his first term in
office. The 1999 Constitution was
ratified by the general public through a national referendum, in which it
passed with a 71.78% 'yes' vote.
Chavez has come under criticism for making the
legal argument that the proposed modifications are "reforms" rather
than "revisions," allowing him to avoid the creation of another
constituent assembly and send his proposals directly to the National Assembly
for review. What is overlooked by
critics however, is the fact that the public must still approve the new reforms
through a national vote. Miguel Tinker
Salas, a Venezuelan Professor of Latin American History at Pomona College, said
that, while "the process up to now has been rather closed, from here
forward we're going to be seeing a broad and ample national debate… It's not
just a matter of a president proposing it and the assembly rubber
stamping."[2]
The National Assembly has
already begun a process of public consultation through which proposed reforms
are distributed in communities across the country for discussion. Mobile units equipped with videoconference
and wireless systems will visit all 23 Venezuelan states to consult with
approximately 5.4 million households, according to that lawmaking body.[3] Diverse interest groups will also be
consulted before feedback is then channeled through local elected leaders who
will present citizens’ perspectives before the National Assembly. The objective of the National Plan to Debate
the Constitutional Reform is “to activate a national political debate and the
participation of the people in the process of constitutional reform aimed to
strengthen revolutionary consciousness, stimulate popular mobilization, and
guarantee the sovereign expression of the majority on the occasion of the
referendum.”[4] Students in the nation’s capital have also
begun discussing the tenets of the reforms and continue to hold open forums in
downtown public plazas.[5]
Rewriting the 1999 Constitution
Significant political and
institutional changes were adopted under Venezuela's 1999 Constitution. With its approval by popular vote, the
national legislature was changed from a bi-cameral body to a uni-cameral one,
known thereafter as the National Assembly.
Currently, the National Assembly consists of 165 deputies elected to
serve five-year terms through a system of proportional representation. Two new branches of government were created,
adding a National Electoral
Council and Human Rights
Ombudsman to the already existing executive, legislative, and judicial
branches. These changes represented an effort to give the population – and
particularly the poor majority – more direct representation in national
politics.
The 1999 Constitution was groundbreaking in that it
guaranteed citizens a new and impressive set of human rights, including free
education, universal health care, and increased civil rights. Additionally, it officially recognized the
existence and value of the original inhabitants of Venezuela- the indigenous -
and recognized the work of housewives as a productive contribution to society
meriting compensation. It completely
overhauled the prior Constitution of 1961, and is considered today to be one of
the most comprehensive and progressive in the world.
In Venezuela,
constitutional reforms may be proposed by either the President of the Republic,
the National Assembly, or 15% of registered voters organized through
petitioning. Constitutional Articles
342, 343, 344, and 345 stipulate that reform proposals must be debated three
times in the National Assembly, modified if needed, and
then each reform must be
approved by two-thirds of members in order to move forward. Those approved must then be voted on no more
than thirty days later by the public in a national referendum. In this final stage, reforms can only be
ratified if supported by a majority of the voting population. As of this writing, the second round of
debates had already taken place (September, 2007).
The
2007 reforms would affect 33 of the 350 articles comprising the 1999
Constitution, or slightly less than ten percent of the legislation. In what follows, the major areas slated for
reform are discussed.
Politics
New proposed constitutional
reforms would make changes to areas including the economic, political, social,
and military spheres, but they do not significantly impact the political
structure of the country, as did the 1999 Constitution. Their most important aim, according to President
Chavez, is to create a “new geometry of power” that increases citizen power and
government accountability.
The
most controversial reform is a proposal to add one year to the current six-year
presidential term and allow for continual reelection (Article 230). Currently, the executive office is subject
to a two-term limit. Despite claims
that the change is a bid by President Chavez to remain in office, the removal
of term limits would not affect the basic system of electoral competition in
Venezuela. It would not restrict the
right of citizens to run candidates against Chavez or his party. Moreover, the
ability of the populace to organize a national recall referendum to oust the
sitting president mid-term would not be altered. This provision is part of the 1999 Constitution and has already
been invoked once, in 2004.
Public
officials in the U.S. have also called for this change, as was the case in 2005
when Congressmen Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and James Sensennbrenner (R-WI), currently
the Majority Leader in the U.S. House of Representatives, introduced a joint
resolution to repeal the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution.[6] The representatives argued that if the
people should want a sitting president to continue, it would be undemocratic
not to afford them the opportunity. He
suggested that although term limits were not fully discussed by the Founding
Fathers, Alexander Hamilton at least recognized the importance of them in
Federalist Paper 72.
Campaign
finance reform is also addressed through Article 67 which would prohibit
political associations or candidates from accepting funds or resources from
foreign governments, and public or private bodies. The State would be responsible for financing all electoral activities.
The Economy
Reforms
currently under review are markedly economic in nature, for, according to the Los Angeles Times, the changes aim to “redistribute power and
resources to the poor and disadvantaged.”[7] Article 112 of the current constitution would be
altered to allow for a "social economy" to replace existing economic
policies, which have for decades favored privatization and neo-liberal
economics.
According
to Venezuela’s state news agency, if approved, Article 112 would put forth new
guarantees to address social needs and stability. Social production through a more communal economy is also
included in the draft reforms to this article.[8] See the comparison below.
Article
112 of the 1999 Constitution currently reads:
The State shall promote private initiative,
guaranteeing the creation and fair distribution of wealth, as well as the
production of goods and services that meet the needs of the populace, freedom
of work, enterprise, commerce, industry, without prejudice to the power of the
State to promulgate measures to plan, rationalize and regulate the economy and
promote the overall development of the country.
According
to the new proposal, Article 112 would read:
The State shall promote
the development of an independent, diversified and intermediate productive
economic model, based on humanistic values such as the cooperation and the
preponderance of common interests that guarantee the fulfillment of the social
needs of the people, social and political stability and happiness.
Furthermore, the State will promote several forms of companies and
economic units of social production (direct
or communal economic units, indirect or state economic units) as well as social
production or/and distribution companies or economic units.[9]
Additionally,
Article 113 would officially prohibit monopolies and the consolidation of
economic resources.
The
major change however, affects Venezuela's Central Bank, which would no longer
be independent of the government.
Article 318 would hand over the Bank’s primary task to elected
officials: the control of monetary policy, largely through short-term interest
rates. Neo-liberal economists frown
upon this method because it relegates the market and the interests of the
economic elite to a less powerful position.
However, interest rates are very important for a nation because they
directly affect the rate of economic growth as well as employment, wages, and
inflation. The government currently
makes decisions on tax and spending policy, and economic development. The proposed reform would increase the government’s
ability to effectively coordinate economic policies by mandating the Executive
and the Central Bank to work closely together to increase economic growth and
development.
Property
The
definition of property would be impacted, and under Article 115 would expand to
include five specific categories:
public, social, collective, mixed, and private. Public property is that
which belongs to state entities, social property belongs to citizens (either
directly or indirectly through the state), collective property belongs to
people or social groups (either in social or private form), mixed property is
based on both public and private ownership, and private property belongs to
individuals and private entities.
Property law would
continue to guarantee that, "Only for reasons of public benefit or social
interest by final judgment, with timely payment of fair compensation, may the
expropriation of any kind of property be declared."[10] As in the past, private property would only
be retrieved by the state in the interest of the public good and fair
compensation would accompany it.
The Military
Venezuela’s military
structure would also be affected by the reforms. Specifically, it is proposed that Venezuela's National Guard be
included as one of five branches of the armed forces under the new name
"Bolivarian Popular Militias." Under Chavez, the National Guard
has taken on an important role in disaster relief and development
projects. Changes would assign the new National Guard a role in national
defense, in addition to maintaining internal order. Venezuela’s armed forces would also be renamed the Bolivarian
Armed Forces.
Article 329 of the
Constitution would be affected, which currently establishes that "The
Army, Navy and Air Force have as their essential responsibility, the planning,
execution and control of military operations as required to ensure the defense
of the Nation."
Further, Article 11 would
incorporate Venezuela’s maritime regions into its sovereign territory and would
allow military regions to be designated to carry out specific activities
ranging from counter narcotics operations to national defense.
Territorial Redefinitions
Similar to zoning in many
countries, Venezuela’s internal boundaries have largely served the interests of
the economic and political elite.
Reforms to Article 16 aim to rectify this historical imbalance. To begin with, resources will become more
accessible for communities who have suffered from a lack of economic
development and infrastructure by being designated as federal districts on the
state, city and local level.
To compliment Venezuela’s
existing political and territorial categories new categories will be created
such as insular districts, cities, and maritime regions. Neighborhood activists and community
organizations will likely benefit from these proposed changes as well as from
the official recognition of “communes”.
The hope is that this will encourage more formal participation by the
community in local public affairs.
Finally, modifications to
Article 184 would require that a national law be proposed to codify the
responsibilities of municipalities in providing resources and services directly
to the community organizations that request them.
Conclusion
In the last decade, the Venezuelan government has put a large amount of resources into citizens and fostering their political empowerment. Through voter registration campaigns and the issuance of national identification cards, voter turnout and participation in local and national politics have increased significantly. Venezuela has had 26 different constitutions since its independence in 1811, but the 1999 Constitution marked the first time that Venezuelans were ever consulted during the rewriting process and the first time they were able to vote on the final draft in a national referendum. Of the 33 articles of the 1999 Constitution that are now subject to modifications, the one most discussed by the international community is the reform proposal connected to article 230, to change presidential term limits. Meanwhile, in Venezuela, most discussed as of this writing is a reform that would reduce the workday from eight hours to six hours. This demonstrates a clear difference in priorities that continues to exist between those directly affected by the changes taking place in Venezuela and those analyzing them from afar. As Venezuela goes about redefining its political path and developing a form of democratic government that challenges classical Western models, it is important to take a thoughtful look at what is happening in that country today. In a process of rapid and dynamic change, mistakes may come with the territory. However, observers of Venezuela will also find impressive experiences in citizen government collaboration, active political engagement, and anti-poverty efforts that are waiting to be discovered.
The Venezuela Information Office is dedicated
to informing the American public about contemporary Venezuela, and receives its
funding from the government of Venezuela.
Further information is available from the FARA office of the Department
of Justice in Washington, DC.