Venezuela's military vows loyalty to VP Maduro
Source: Buenos Aires Herald Tribune
Venezuela's military chiefs appeared live on state TV today to pledge their loyalty to Vice President Nicolas Maduro following the death of President Hugo Chávez.
Read more: http://www.buenosairesherald.com/article/125675/venezuelas-military-vows-loyalty-to-vp-maduro
This is unsettling. The Constitution is very, very clear that with Chavez's death control of the country should be in the hands of the elected speaker of the National Assembly.
As Jimmy Carter has recently pointed out, Venezuela has the best election system in the world
Instead, the military has pledged loyalty to a man who under the best democracy in the world is not actually supposed to be in power.
Still, one would prefer if the power lay in the constitution and not the military.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)Or is this another, "Chavez had a billion dollars" thread?
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)And it's been posted here before.
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)Do you have a copy of the actual part of the Constitution that says this?
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)Article 233:
The President of the Republic* shall
become permanently unavailable to
serve by reason of any of the following events:
death; resignation;
removal from office by
decision of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice;
permanent physical or
mental disability
certified by a medical board designated by
the Supreme Tribunal of Justice with the
approval of the National Assembly; abandonmen
t of his position, du
ly declared by the
National Assembly; and recall by popular vot
e. When an elected President* becomes
permanently unavailable to serve prior to
his inauguration, a new
election by universal
suffrage and direct ballot shall be held w
ithin 30 consecutive days. Pending election and
inauguration of the new President*, the Presid
ent* of the National Assembly shall take
charge of the Presidency of the Republic.
http://www.venezuelaemb.or.kr/english/ConstitutionoftheBolivarianingles.pdf
freshwest
(53,661 posts)I went to the link and it said this what you have in the OP, plus this paragraph:
Chávez had named Maduro as his preferred successor.
The article didn't cite their Constitution leading me to think this is an unsettling turn of events. IMO, the military saying they support the VP is a more stable position and what the people there expected after Chavez passed on. YMMV.
Overseas
(12,121 posts)
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)from an article with 2 sentences.
There will soon be an election there as prescribed by their constitution. I doubt the military chiefs literally said they are bypassing the constitution and declaring Maduro as the president starting today.
More info would be helpful, this article tells us next to nothing.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)The constitution is very explicit, and the head of the national assembly should be in charge. Instead the military has gone and proclaimed it's support for someone else.
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)in this thread.
It says the Pres of the Nat'l Assembly is president for the 30 days or less until an election for a new President is held.
There is nothing in that 2 sentence article that contradicts that. They have not declared that Maduro is president or anything of the sort. They have not installed a new president. In fact, it sounds like all they did was give some platitudes to reassure people that there is stability. Their president just died. People are worried. Western capitalist powers have fucked with them over and over in times of vulnerability.
I would like to see more of what these chiefs actually said. If you want to argue that they are subverting the constitution through a mere statement of support made on TV, you will need to provide more evidence.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)Let's just wait a few days and find out which one of them is in charge, and then we will know.
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)the assumptions/conclusions you have made throughout the thread, stated as fact despite your lack of evidence, while we wait and see...
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)I think I know perfectly what has happened. You disagree. there is no point in arguing about it. We will know tomorrow if the head of the national assembly is in charge or not.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)Even in death, Chavez's orders were being heeded. The man he anointed to succeed him, Vice President Nicolas Maduro, will continue to run Venezuela as interim president and be the governing socialists' candidate in an election to be called within 30 days.
In a late night tweet, Venezuelan state-television said Defense Minister Adm. Diego Molero had pledged military support for Maduro's candidacy against likely opposition candidate Henrique Capriles, despite a constitutional mandate that the armed forces play a non-political role.
Please excuse the foxnews link to the AP story:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/03/06/chavez-hand-picked-successor-takes-command-in-venezuela/
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)hadn't realized that the foreign minister and others had declared Maduro as pres. That's why I was asking for more info - the article in the OP doesn't say much of anything at all. I admit I haven't been following all this closely in the last 24 hours.
Unfortunately all the sources are pretty bad right now. And propaganda goes into overdrive at this point.
reorg
(3,317 posts)He can voice any opinion he wants, and as a member of Hugo Chavez' cabinet I'm not surprised he doesn't support the opposition.
BTW, Chavez did not "anoint" or "order" Maduro to succeed him. What he did, very publicly, was to entreat his followers to VOTE for Maduro.
reorg
(3,317 posts)That's exactly what it was. I watched the statement live on TV and while I didn't understand every single word, it was very clear that the gist of the message was: We are not going to interfere with the political process.
He maintained several times over, practically introduced every sentence he spoke with the assertion that the military pledges allegiance to the constitution.
NYC Liberal
(20,453 posts)The constitution says if the president dies before he is inaugurated, the President of the National Assembly assumes power. But if he dies during the first four years of his term, the Vice President takes over.
Chavez was never inaugurated, but didn't the Venezuelan Supreme Court rule recently that the inauguration was unnecessary and that the new term had begun regardless? I don't know if that is a totally bogus decision, but it's what they ruled. It would seem that since his term had already legally begun then the Vice President does indeed take over. I could be wrong.
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)Isn't he still president from his former election?
That would be like saying Obama isn't President between election and swearing in, and as you said, their Sepreme Court ruled on in swearing in already.
NYC Liberal
(20,453 posts)If Obama hadn't been sworn in on January 20 (let's say it was delayed), would he be president? Legally the constitutional term would have begun but is Obama not president until he's taken the oath?
That's the situation here since Chavez's inauguration was delayed. The Venezuelan Supreme Court ruled that this could happen and he would still be president regardless because the term had begun on the date specified. Going by that legal ruling then his term had begun and the VP is the correct person to take over.
Arctic Dave
(13,812 posts)Not that the opposition would agree.
Seems they are going ahead with elections either way.
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)Stand-in president announced
Venezuela's minister of foreign affairs Elias Jaua has said that the vice-president Nicolas Maduro, Chávez's anointed heir, will stand in as acting president following Chavez's death.
Maduro is also to run for the snap elections stipulated by the constitution. Jaua said:
"This is the mandate that comandante presidente Hugo
Chávez gave us ...What follows is very clearly established, it's what we always defended. We are now in front of an absolute absence, the VP assumes as president and elections are called for the next 30 days."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/06/hugo-chavez-death-reaction-live#block-5137410eb579468c9b90393f
(sorry, it's on a blog and there isn't a permalink)
The bottom line is that there will be a timely election. There is some debate on whether the VP can be named interim president but so far the only places I see this being a real controversy is on DU and in center-right US rags by implication. The fact that Chavez wasn't re-inaugurated after his last re-election has something to do with the succession plans. I'm sure details will emerge.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)there would be civil unrest and coup attempts. From what I heard on Al Jazeera, the National Assembly is meeting to form a new government under the guidelines of their Constitution. Maduro, who has been running the country is taking care of business in the meantime.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"This is unsettling. .."
Almost as unsettling as imagining a coup is in the making based on zero evidence. Not that you would do that, of course...
Still, one would prefer critical analysis over imaginative prognostications... or something like that. 
Unsettling, indeed.
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)Constitutionally, gentlemen, you have the President, the Vice President and the Secretary of State in that order, and should the President decide he wants to transfer the helm to the Vice President, he will do so. He has not done that. As of now, I am in control here, in the White House, pending return of the Vice President and in close touch with him. If something came up, I would check with him, of course.
Go get em Al Haig.
What is "unsettling" is the sadness felt across the world in a loss of an idea. Not the man so much. He was flawed, but not what he made people believe in. It is "unsettling" that this Admin is finally going to "talk" to Venezuela, now that there is a chance that we can bully them again. What is "unsettling" is that most Americans are too fucking dumb to know what "unsettling" really means.
John2
(2,730 posts)where there is none. The speaker of the National Assembly was first appointed by Chavez and then elected to office. They are all in the same political Party that dominates Venezuela's Government period. The changing of the Constitution for Venezuela was initiated by Chavez. So essentially you can see Chavez as the father of the very written Constitution you cite. And the present speaker of the National Assembly was also formerly a military officer that supported Chavez when they led a coup against the former President. So if the Speaker agreed with this transition, there may not be a transition problem at all. Chavez is essentially the father of a revolution that created the present Venezuela Constitution.
naaman fletcher
(7,362 posts)So why not follow the constitution?