Venezuela Human Rights and Democracy (1999-2009): Human Rights and Democracy in Venezuela

Copyright © 2013 by Carlos González Irago.

Library of Congress Control Number:      2013906260

ISBN:   Hardcover   978-1-4633-5456-5

            Softcover      978-1-4633-5455-8

            Ebook           978-1-4633-5454-1

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Revised Date: 26/08/2013

To order additional copies of this book, contact:

Palibrio LLC

1663 Liberty Drive, Suite 200

Bloomington, IN 47403

Toll Free from the U.S.A 877.407.5847

Toll Free from Mexico 01.800.288.2243

Toll Free from Spain 900.866.949

From other International locations +1.812.671.9757

Fax: +1.812.355.1576

orders@palibrio.com

438780

Contents

Biography

Acknowledgments

Introduction

Chapter I

Theoretical Framework for a Universal and Multicultural Perspective on Human Rights

Ahimsa: Cross-Cultural Principle of Non-violence

Henry Shue: The Political Model of Basic Human Rights

Chapter II

Basic Rights of Security: Historical Development in Venezuela

State Terrorism and Democratic Fiction during the IV Republic

Methodology Used to Study State Terrorism in Liberal Democracies

Scope, Intensity, and Range of State Terror

Venezuelan Democratic Fiction

Civilian authoritarian regimen of national security

The V Republic: New Geopolitical Model of Sovereignty and Security.

The New Bolivarian Model of Citizen Security

Organic Law of Police service and National Police Force

Conclusion

Chapter III

Soberanía alimentaria: food the first subsistence basic human right

3.1 Introduction

From Agrarian Reforms (1946-1999) to the New Land Law (2005)

Trienio: Direct Agrarian Reform (1946-1949)

Indirect reform: the 1960 Land Agrarian law

The impact of the indirect agrarian reform of 1960 on the peasantry

Bolivarian Revolution: New Land Law -Ley de Tierras y Desarrollo Agrario- (2005)

Food sovereignty: new model of agricultural development

Bolivarian Land distribution and organization of peasants and farmers

Chapter IV

Development of the Second Right of Subsistence – Free and Obligatory Education

New Constitutional Framework in Venezuela and its effect on Education

The Bolivarian Missions: The Transformation of the Oppressed into a Liberated Subject

Media War: A Challenge to Critical Thinking and Democracy

Quantative Impact of the Bolivarian Revolution in Education

Conclusion: Educational method of Social Integration

Chapter V

Development of the Third Right of Subsistence: Healthcare for All

The Bolivarian Government Turned Healthcare on its Head

Mission Barrio Adentro: A New National Model of Public Health

The Jose Gregorio Hernandez Mission: Integrating people with functional diversity

General Conclusions

Bibliography

In memory of Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías

leader of the Bolivarian Revolution.

Gracias comandante

Biography

Carlos Gonzalez-Irago was born in Caracas, Venezuela (1958). He studied in Spain, graduating from the Universidad Complutense in Madrid with a degree in Journalism. He has worked as an editor/journalist for several Spanish, Venezuelan and Californian newspapers. Gonzalez Irago has conducted academic research in Canada, Nicaragua, Venezuela, El Salvador and Mexico. His first book was a study on the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua with the title Patria y Libertad: the Human Rights Philosophy of Augusto C. Sandino, and was published in 1995. He holds a Ph. D. in Philosophy and two M.A. degrees, History and Philosophy, in addition to a number of other educational certificates and awards from the California State University system. He has served on the Bilingual Advisory Committee of the Oakland Unified School District and held various teaching positions in the San Francisco Bay Area and New Jersey. In 2011, Gonzalez Irago graduated with a doctoral degree in Latin-American Philosophy at the Universidad Centro Americana (UCA) José Simeón Cañas in San Salvador (El Salvador). This book is an English version of his doctoral dissertation. At the present he is a Spanish, Latin American history and Human Rights teacher at Bergen County Academies in Hackensack, New Jersey.

Acknowledgments

I’m incredibly indebted, both professionally and personally, to all the people that have supported me while I was completing this work. First I’d like to thank all the professors and fellow students at the Department of Iberoamerican Philosophy at the Universidad Centroamericana José Simeón Cañas for their academic and personal support. The UCA is exemplary in its fight for peace and human rights in Latin America and is renowned for its program in Philosophy -initiated by Ellacuria himself- where the most famous philosophers and theologians of the Liberation movement have worked. It is a philosophy committed to the social integration of most Salvadorians into democratic life. In a world where falsity, injustice, and repression prevail, the mission of the UCA is to fight for truth, justice, and liberty. This continues being the University’s motto. In order to achive this, we must not remain indifferent to those that have no rights.

As a student I was lucky enough to know Carlos Beorlegui, Pablo Guadarrama, Juan Antonio Estrada, Marcos Santos Gómez and so many others that either directly or indirectly influenced the present work. Special thanks go out to the Dr. Héctor Samour, Dr. José Francisco Lazo y Dr. Guido Véjar for clearing up some of the doubts I had during the planning of my thesis. Thanks for all the input, corrections, criticism, and praise. Felipe Ventura’s translation and editing work, as well as his input, have been critical to the English edition of the book. Thanks to Beverly Cooper and Mark Lev for their extraordinary design work. Felipe and Mark were students at Bergen County Academies, and it is a great pleasure to work with them in a new professional capacity.

I am also indebted to all the professors at the New School University in New York and at San Francisco State University in California since it was during my time there that I began this project. I'd like to personally thank professors Adamantia Pollis, Aristide Zolberg, Anthony Pereira, Diane Davies, Eric Hobsbawn, Jacob Landynsky, Kosta Bagakis and Ann Ginger Fagan for their help and their inspiration. I am particularly indebted to Dr. Adamantia Pollis and Dr. Héctor Samour. They helped me against all odds to continue my investigation and study related to human rights in Venezuela.

My fellow Venezuelan journalists Ángel Bastidas, Octavio Isabel Beaumont, Joaquín Ortuño among many other of my compatriots that share with me the hope and inspiration of the Bolivarian Revolution must also be mentioned. It has been a pleasure to work with them despite the distance that separates us. Thank you Professor Carmen Bohórquez at Universidad del Zulia for informing me about the organization of philosophical congresses, which contributed to a better understanding of what is really happening in Venezuela. I also appreciate the kindness of my editors at Palibrio, who helped me in the publication of this book.

On a personal level I am profoundly grateful to my ex-partner Adriana Cifuentes for her love, patience, and enthusiasm during the long years of research. I am thankful to Marcia Hernandez for making my life easier, which in turn made hers more difficult. A heartfelt thank you goes out to all the kind and friendly Salvadorians who helped me during my years of university life in that wonderful country. A special thanks to Barrio Antiguo Cuscatlán and the workers and owners of the Hotel Arbol de Fuego, where I had the opportunity to stay on more than one occasion. I am grateful to my family and especially to my mother Tere, and my siblings María Teresa, Pedro, Ingrid and Carolina for their unconditional support. A special shutout goes out to my friend and disability rights activist Francisco Chico Martín, Patxi, who in more than one way was fundamental in completing this work. His revolutionary commitment and his sensibility for those who are unjustly marginalized have motivated me to find the perseverance needed to finish this job.

Finally, I have to thank my fellow colleagues and friends in the US: Edel Romay, Dra. Nancy Joa, Dr. Dario Cortes, Patricio Barriga, Lule Seltzer, Igor Jasinky, Beverly Cooper, Carmen Rodriguez, Aldo Bautista, and Maryann Woods Murphy and her family for all their support, friendship, and their constructive criticism and discussion concerning the themes related to this work. I can’t forget my students at the Bergen County Academies, particularly those that participated in my class on the ‘Theory and Practice of Human Rights’. Their ideas, philosophical discussions, and support for human rights are a continuous source of motivation.

Introduction

"The Bolivarian Constitution will transform the Venezuelan state into a new Democratic and Socially Just State with a new juridical framework that will allow the effective function of a democratic and participative political system. A democratic system is now a guarantor of human dignity and autonomous human development where state power will be executed in accordance to human rights. Therefore, the centrality of human rights — now at the core of the Constitutional Law—makes any public or state action against human rights null, and those involved in such violations fully responsible under the Law¹."

Politically, the Bolivarian Constitution is extraordinary in that it uses the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) as its legal inspiration. This study aims to understand the centrality of human rights in Venezuela today and what philosophical and political models it has proposed.

Venezuela’s constitutional project is a response to a historical juncture present in Latin America today, and it will be analyzed through humanist philosopher Henry Shue’s defense of security and subsistence as basic human rights². Shue stressed that human rights must first guarantee an individual’s identity and personal security while providing a minimum level of subsistence. Only after these needs were met could people function in a true political sense. The responsibility to ensure these rights is a state’s responsibility³. In this way, Henry Shue’s theories parallel the philosophies of the Liberation Movement in Latin America. They both support a state model that defends basic human rights and the philosophies of participation, dialogue, and consensus-forming that Raúl Fornet-Betancourt, Enrique Dussel and Emmanuel Levinas have promoted through their works.

For Shue, rights only exist when "there is a guarantee that the necessary arrangements are in place for their enjoyment by the people⁴." Thus, institutions are created to enact and protect these rights. Given the difficulty of applying imported models, ideological alternatives have emerged to counteract a globalization that often distorts human rights and the pacifist functions of international institutions. When the state assumes responsibility and defends basic human rights on a national and international level it limits the abuses of globalization.

Basic human rights are an effort to give vetoing power to those with little agency in a global and national context⁵. In this way, human rights becomes a stepping-stone for cultural dialogue between communities ⁶ and reveals the abuse by states who use human rights for personal gains. Henry Shue’s theory places the state at the helm of developing and sustaining individual human rights within and outside its borders⁷. This form of solidarity requires a state model that confronts powers that monopolize wealth, foment marginalization, and violate the most basic of human rights.

Henry Shue’s model can be applied independently of political perspective since it shares common ground in both liberalism and socialism. He states:

The best government is the one that complies and protects human rights. In many cases this just means refraining from violating citizens’ rights, but many times it requires the creation of legal and real institutions to do the job. The institutions created are the necessary ones to fulfill this function and they will vary under different circumstances⁸.

Thus, the defense of human rights becomes a viable way to transition between an authoritarian or semi-democratic government into a truly democratic one, where all participate and believe that basic human rights form the foundation to all political dialogue. In the philosophical words of the Liberation Movement, a state that promotes human rights must possess three essential elements: it must recognize the existence of all without exclusion, guarantee marginalized sectors the rights of security, subsistence, and participation, and construct an open cultural consensus that promotes solidarity.

Throughout the years, Venezuelan politics has experienced tumultuous advances and setbacks in human rights. However, in 1999 I noticed that the political measures that were being implemented converged with Henry Shue’s proposals. This reality conflicted with the frequent broadcasts of human rights violations in national and international media. Given this disconnect, I chose to explore the position that the legal centrality of basic human rights, as proposed by Henry Shue, is the foundation of the new Bolivarian state. The centrality of human rights in the Bolivarian Constitution goes beyond legal rhetoric. There is a direct relationship between the theoretical model that defends basic human rights, its constitutional practice, and the institutional politics being implemented by the Bolivarian state. The gap that existed between laws and their application has been reduced in scope. Its premise is the inclusion of those that were previously marginalized in politics.

During its first ten years, the Bolivarian Revolution has developed an alternative to the dominant neoliberal model of national security of the IV Republic by advancing the centrality of human rights. It involves a complex cultural exchange and requires converting individuals traumatized by injustice into protagonists of a new democratic society. It contrasts with the model of national security proposed by neo-liberalism, one that presents itself as an inevitable future ravaging the globe. This is a model that misrepresents human rights and favors corporate and economic interests. Despite being a liberal democracy and having the means to enact them, basic rights in Venezuela were not recognized for the majority of the population. Unfortunately, this situation is not unique to Venezuela.

Shue’s defense of basic human rights parallels social and political objectives raised by Latin-American leaders throughout history. Its constitutional grounding and solidarity are reminiscent of the government of Salvador Allende in Chile. The political and social theories that aim to overcome dependence and underdevelopment parallel those raised by Simon Bolivar, Jose Marti, and prominent thinkers in the theology and philosophy of the Liberation movement. Its educational framework supports Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed.

Legal advances under the Bolivarian Revolution represents a rupture with the disastrous model of national security⁹ that justified state sponsored violence and terrorism during the IV Republic and in Latin America during the Cold War. This model justified the kidnapping, torture, and assassination of hundreds of thousands of Latin Americans and legitimized an unjust economic system that continues condemning millions to poverty. The Bolivarian Revolution is a genuine attempt at establishing a model that eliminates both state terrorism and economic misery in order to advance integration.

Historically, the adoption of the UDHR was one of the last significant events preceding the Cold War. During the period of 1945-1949, worker’s rights and labor movements gained momentum in many underdeveloped countries. Confronted with the specter of Soviet influence, the US justified the model of national security as a military necessity in the hemisphere. The Cold War rolled back the democratic advances made during 1945-49 and propped the Latin-American military into power. In turn, the military severed their connection to the heroes that defended liberty and national sovereignty. Inevitably, the national security model compromised independent sovereignty and made the state a repressive entity. The model of national security dominated the American continent until the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War in 1989. As a consequence, there was a wave of democratic changes that swept Latin America. Alternative democratic models outside of US hegemony have proceeded in creating a human rights culture in Latin America. Initiatives advancing a political culture of security and subsistence like MERCOSUR, UNASUR, and ALBA are windows to the possibilities that lay ahead. Unfortunately, the national security model still exists in various countries and has seen an all-out resurgence following the attacks of September 11.

From 1999 onwards, the revolutionary processes initiated in Venezuela have led to a rupture with the past. Most notably, there is a new constitution that defines the priority of defending human rights for all Venezuelans. A country previously marred by political violence now uses the ballot to legitimize political decisions that affect all citizens. Constitutional referendums, constitutional reforms, presidential elections, elections for the legislative assembly and municipal counsel, and recall processes have all been decided through the ballot. The results, validity, and transparency of these processes are visible to all through the Supreme Electoral Counsel of Venezuela. Furthermore, direct, anonymous, and impartial elections have been established to elect leaders in certain political parties, which has radically changed the political culture of the country.

This study aims to compare the changes underway in the Bolivarian Revolution with those that occurred during the IV Republic. While the future still needs to be constructed the virtue of the Bolivarian Revolution is that it creates a theoretical model capable of defending its achievements. It defines a new model of security and subsistence inspired by a socialism that emphasizes the creation of institutions and practices that democratize the basic human rights of all.

Chapter I

Theoretical Framework for a Universal and Multicultural Perspective on Human Rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) came about as a response to the brutality of WWII and is a legal document for world peace linked to the UN, an international and multinational institution created as a forum for consensus and dialogue. However, the UN lacks definitive power and authority over nation-states, particularly those with veto power in the Security Council. Therefore, the UN depends on the good will of nation-states and their commitment to world peace, which is not always a priority among nations with military ambitions or those directly involved in conflict. Apart from this balance of power, the contents of the UDHR face additional theoretical challenges such as the division between an individual’s civil and political rights and economic, cultural, and collective rights¹⁰. Despite all these challenges, the UDHR is still the main reference on human rights issues today. Scholars and activists alike agree that both the UDHR and the UN offer the best framework in creating an inclusive politics within the realm of cultural peace and dignity.

A law that includes all of humanity cannot be accomplished without first finding basic cross-cultural and ethical principles that help generate an honest cross-cultural dialogue on human rights. After years of research and reflection, a definitive theory and culture of human rights is emerging¹¹. I believe this is best exemplified through the concept of ahimsa, which Mohandas K. Gandhi defined as the basic law of being human.

It basically means to refrain from causing injury to others. That is why it can be used as the most effective principle for action, since it is in deep accord with the truth of a human being’s nature and corresponds to our innate desire for peace, justice, order, freedom, and personal dignity. Ahimsa also heals and restores human nature, while being a means to also restore social order and justice. It is a way of transforming relationships so as to bring