<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="container font-size5 content-width3">
<div class="header reader-header reader-show-element" dir="ltr"> <font
size="-2"><a class="domain reader-domain"
href="https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/venezuela-president-maduro-illegitimate-10-facts-counter-lies">https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/venezuela-president-maduro-illegitimate-10-facts-counter-lies</a></font>
<h1 class="reader-title">Venezuela: Is President Maduro
'illegitimate'? 10 facts to counter the lies</h1>
<div class="credits reader-credits">Pascualina CurcioJanuary -
25, 2019</div>
</div>
<hr>
<div class="content">
<div class="moz-reader-content line-height4 reader-show-element"
dir="ltr">
<div id="readability-page-1" class="page">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p>Have those who state that Nicolás Maduro is a
dictator, a usurper, and that the 2019-2025
presidential period lacks legitimacy, asked
themselves why he is illegitimate? Or do they just
repeat what they hear?</p>
<p>This opinion was first advanced by the 12 Latin
American countries that make up the Lima Group.
Their statement reads: “The electoral process
carried out in Venezuela on 20th May 2018 lacks
legitimacy in that it didn’t have the participation
of all Venezuelan political actors, nor the presence
of independent international observers, nor the
international guarantees and standards needed for it
to be a free, just, and transparent process.”</p>
<p>The leaders of the Venezuelan opposition, the
non-democratic ones, repeat ceaselessly, and without
arguments, that Maduro is a usurper.</p>
<p>In a desperate act, the United States
Vice-President Mike Pence, having had to call
personally for the opposition march on January 23
due to the incompetence of the opposition’s leaders,
insisted and repeated that President Nicolás Maduro
is a dictator, usurper, and illegitimate.</p>
<p>The strategy is clear: repeat the lie a thousand
times to turn it into truth. Let’s dismantle this
lie.</p>
<p>***</p>
<h2><strong>1. </strong></h2>
<p>There was a presidential election. It was carried
out on May 20, 2018, months before January 10, when
according to articles 230 and 231 of the
Constitution, the 2013-2019 presidential period runs
out. The Constitution would have been contravened if
the election was carried out after January 10 — or
never held.</p>
<h2>
<strong>2.</strong></h2>
<p>It was the Venezuelan opposition that requested an
early election. It was held in May rather than
December, as is tradition, because the opposition
asked, during a dialogue with the government held in
the Dominican Republic, for it to be conducted in
the first term of 2018.</p>
<h2>
<strong>3. </strong></h2>
<p>In Venezuela voting is a right, but not compulsory.
Those who freely, although influenced by
undemocratic political organisations that called for
abstention, decided not to vote had every right to
do so. But in no way does this delegitimise the
electoral process, especially when this would imply
disregarding the 9,389,056 people who decided to
vote and exercised democratically their right to
suffrage.</p>
<h2>
<strong>4. </strong></h2>
<p>Sixteen political parties participated in the
electoral contest, including governing PSUV and the
MSV, Tupamaro, UPV, Podemos, PPT, ORA, MPAC, MEP,
PCV, AP, MAS, Copei, Esperanza por el Cambio, and
UPP89.</p>
<p>In Venezuela it is not compulsory that all
political parties participate in electoral
processes. It is their right to choose whether to
participate or not. That’s exactly why our system is
democratic. The fact that three parties (AD, VP, and
PJ) decided freely not to participate does not
delegitimise the electoral process.</p>
<h2>
<strong>5. </strong></h2>
<p>Six candidates competed for presidency: Nicolás
Maduro, Henri Falcón, Javier Bertucci, Reinaldo
Quijada, Francisco Visconti Osorio and Luis
Alejandro Ratti (the last two later decided to
withdraw.)</p>
<h2>
<strong>6. </strong></h2>
<p>Maduro won by a wide margin, obtaining 6,248,864
votes, that is 67.84%; followed by Henri Falcón with
1,927,958, or 20.93%; Javier Bertucci with
1,015,895, 10.82%; and Reinaldo Quijada, who
obtained 36,246 votes, or 0.39% of the total. The
difference between Maduro and Falcón was of 46.91
percentage points.</p>
<h2>
<strong>7. </strong></h2>
<p>The electoral process was observed by about 150
people, including 14 electoral commissions from
eight countries; two technical electoral missions;
18 journalists from different parts of the world;
one member of the European Parliament, and one
technical-electoral delegation from the Russian
Electoral Centre.</p>
<h2>
<strong>8. </strong></h2>
<p>This election was carried out with the same
electoral system used in the election for
Venezuela’s National Assembly in December 2015, in
which the Venezuelan opposition won. This system is
automated, and audited before, during, and after the
elections. The system guarantees the principle of
“one voter, one vote” because only fingerprints
enable the voting machine, as well as guaranteeing
secrecy of vote.</p>
<h2>
<strong>9. </strong></h2>
<p>Eighteen audits were carried out on the automated
system. The representatives of Henri Falcón
participated in all 18 and signed the minutes in
which they state their conformity with the voting
system.</p>
<p>The audits are public and broadcast live by the
National Election Council’s TV channel. Once the
audits are done, the system locks, and the only way
of accessing it again is by introducing
simultaneously the passwords that each political
organisation has.</p>
<h2>
<strong>10. </strong></h2>
<p>None of the candidates that participated in the
electoral process contested the results. There is no
proof of fraud; no evidence or concrete reports of
fraud have been presented. The presidential
elections of May 20, 2018 were free, transparent,
reliable, secure, and conforming with the
Constitution and the law, despite the
anti-democratic calls to abstention from a sector of
the opposition.</p>
<p>***</p>
<p>It is others who aspire to usurp the presidency.
They argue there is a supposed absent power, which
is not contemplated in our Constitution, and seek to
establish a “transition government”, a concept that
does not exist in the Constitution either.
Furthermore, they aspire to exercise power outside
our borders, in violation of article 18, which
defines Caracas as the location for the public
office.</p>
<p>In view of all this, it is clear that it is not
Maduro but others who are the usurpers, illegitimate
and anti-democratic.</p>
<p>The fact that some sectors of the opposition intend
to assert themselves, with the support of foreign
imperialist governments, to exercise an authority
that neither the people nor the Constitution gives
them is clearly illegitimate and an attempt to
usurp.</p>
<p>Let’s repeat this truth a thousand times.</p>
<p>[Pascualina Curcio is an economist based at the
Simon Bolivar University in Caracas, Venezuela.
Translated by Pedro Alvarez from <a
href="http://www.15yultimo.com/2019/01/23/ilegitimo-por-que-pasqualina-curcio-comentario-de-jose-g-pina/">15yUltimo</a>.]</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863.9977
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://freedomarchives.org/">https://freedomarchives.org/</a>
</div>
</body>
</html>