Simple succession of facts in regards the constitutionally inexistent, and materially illegitimate, under against humanity criminal grounds, “legitimizing dialogue” in Mexico, between Venezuelans.
First, on January 16, 1961, the Constitution of the Republic of Venezuela was approved by all the Venezuelan forces. And entered in empowerment on January 23, 1961.
Second, Hugo Rafael Chavez Frías, through a secondary law, called for a referendum in order to consult the Venezuelans if they will be willing to call for a Constituent Congress in order to have a new Constitution. Yet the majority of the people who voted, voted in favor, 62.35% of the Venezuelans failed to vote in either sense, making it around 65-67% of Venezuelans who failed to approve the new Constitution, as an idea.
Third, that decision was submitted for the validation of the Supreme Court of Justice of Venezuela, that on March 18, 1999, in decisions 17 and 18, in simple words, signalized, as was logical, that the validity of such referendum was for an amendment to the Constitution of 1961 be done, so the process to fully reform the Constitution be stablished in the Constitution.
Fourth, to contextualize the arbitrary intention, we, besides pointing he latter eliminated that Supreme Court, can translate what Hugo Rafael Chavez Frías said on January 6, 1999: “I do not care the pacts nor the parliamentary proposals as we will not get together and lose the time in finding the viability of a constitutional reform before the Constituent Congress”.
Fifth, by reason of this anti-democratic and arbitrary process, President Barack Hussein Obama II’s Administration, started, on April 23, 1999, to impose valid sanctions, and Hugo Rafael Chavez Frías started to victimize himself.
Sixth, on December 30, 1999, in the Official State Journal of the Republic of Venezuela, number 36.860, year CXXVII, month III, it was made public, (as before was voted), a version of that invalid Constitution that stated, in article 348, that the initiative for a Constituent Congress could be done by the President of the Republic in Council of Ministers, the National Assembly, by agreement of two thirds of its members, the Municipal Councils Lobbies, by vote of two thirds of them, and the fifteen percent of the electors comprised in the electoral register. Needing to point that there are apparently fraudulent versions that substitute the “and” that was voted and published, for “or”.
Seventh, on March 5, 2013, Hugo Rafael Chavez Frías died, and in a questionable way, under a yet invalid Constitution, violating its article 233, Nicolas Maduro Moros, assumed as de-facto President of Venezuela, latter being voted as de-facto President of Venezuela, under such invalid Constitution, on April 14, 2013.
Eight, since at least February 12, 2014, when protests erupted as earlier as January 5, 2014, in the city of Merida, (by information received by a panel of experts), as pointed, on September 26, 2018, by the Republic of Argentina, Canada, the Republic of Colombia, the Republic of Chile, the Republic of Paraguay, and the Republic of Peru, to the International Criminal Court; since 2014, there have been committed in Venezuela, crimes against humanity, including murder, extrajudicial executions, imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty, the excessive use of force in security operations unrelated to the protests, arbitrary detentions, torture, sexual abuse, rape, the persecution of an identifiable group or collectivity on political grounds, the enforced disappearance of persons, as well as flagrant attacks against due process, to the detriment of people of both genders, including minors. At the same time, systematic actions have been carried out against young men between 15 and 30 years old, who, without justification, have been arrested or taken away from their homes to accuse them of acts they would not have committed, or to kill them on the grounds that they resisted. The general or systematic actions would have been part of de-facto security plans (such as the so-called “Zamora Plan”) designed by the de-facto Government of the de-facto President Nicolás Maduro Moros, which involved not only de-facto State security forces, but also organizations and groups of people aligned with the, under a yet invalid constitutional order, de-facto Government, which, without being part of said de-facto forces, act in a coordinated manner with these, as part of a de-facto State anti-opposition policy. This situation was deepened and intensified significantly since 2015 and alarmingly in 2017, as pointed, on December 31, 2017, by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, in the report entitled “Democratic Institutions, the Rule of Law and Human Rights in Venezuela”, which highlights “the weakness in democratic institutions and the progressive deterioration of the human rights situation in Venezuela”.
Ninth, under this context, of an invalid constitutional order since Hugo Rafael Chavez Frías, of a questionable succession by Nicolas Maduro Moros, of the protests, and subsequent crimes agains humanity, that started since 2014; on December 6, 2015, Nicolas Maduro Moros, lost the elections for the de-facto National Assembly, where the de-facto deputies would have had a period of exercise from January 5, 2016, to January 5, 2021.
Tenth, on April 26, 2016, after have been declared by the de-facto President of the National Assembly on January 5, 2016, a de-facto movement to remove Nicolas Maduro Moros from his de-facto office, was started; the de-facto interested people willing to do the referendum at the end of 2016, but the de-facto National Electoral Council, saying it to be done until the beginning of 2017.
Eleventh, on January 2016, the de-facto Supreme Court of Venezuela, under an illegitimate constitutional order that eliminated the legitimate Supreme Court since Hugo Rafael Chavez Frías, declared that the de-facto National Assembly was in disrespect, declaring null all acts from the de-facto National Assembly, since January 5, 2016; then, on March 28, 2016, with ruling 155, the de-facto Supreme Court retired all immunity to the deputies. Latter, on March 29, 2016, with ruling 156, the de-facto Supreme Court of Venezuela, under an illegitimate constitutional order, where the legitimate Supreme Court was eliminated in an invalid way, since Hugo Rafael Chavez Frías, declared itself, or whoever they decide, to be the de-facto National Assembly.
Twelve, on May 1, 2017, Nicolas Maduro Moros called for a Constituent Congress to establish a new Constitution, what generated more sanctions. This convocation, not solely violated article 348 of the yet invalid Constitution of Venezuela, as above stated in point sixth, but directly called, under an extreme human rights violations context, to the clienteles of the so-called “chavismo”, for the Constituent Congress to be directly voted; not even as Hugo Rafael Chavez Frías did, to consult the people if they wanted a Constituent Congress, in first instance. This de-facto Constituent Congress was established on August 4, 2017, solely by de-facto official representatives. This illegitimate de-facto Constituent Congress took massive arbitrary decisions. And many protest and facts where crimes against humanity were committed, erupted and occurred.
Thirteenth, on May 20, 2018, under the signalized invalid constitutional order, premature elections were called, and Nicolas Maduro Moros, was de-facto re-elected for a new period of six years. The de-facto opposition was put into prison, exiled, or disabled to participate. There was absence of international observants, and intimidatory tactics to force the people to de-facto vote for Nicolas Maduro Moros, were imposed.
Fourteenth, on December 6, 2020, there were, without any de-facto opposition, and under the signalized invalid constitutional order, elections for a de-facto new National Assembly, that de-facto started on January 5, 2021, until January 5, 2026.
Fifteenth, on December 18, 2020, the de-facto Constituent Congress was disolved without any new Constitution issued, claiming its end for reestablishing the peace, was fulfilled.
Sixteenth, under this context, on June 15, 2021, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bom Bensouda, concluded that there are reasonable basis to believe that crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court have been committed in Venezuela, and that that determination will be handed over to the incoming Prosecutor for his consideration and ultimate decision-making. As set out in her 2020 Report on Preliminary Examination Activities, the Prosecutor concluded that the information available provides reasonable basis to believe that since at least April 2017, (de-facto) civilian authorities, members of the (de-facto) armed forces, and pro-[(de-facto)]government individuals, have committed the crimes against humanity of imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty, in violation of fundamental rules of international law pursuant to article 7(1)(e); torture pursuant to article 7(1)(f); rape and/or other forms of sexual violence of comparable gravity pursuant to article 7(1)(g); and persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political grounds pursuant to article 7(1)(h) of the Rome Statute.
Seventeenth, under this context, on August 13, 2021, a “dialogue” between this de-facto Government, accused of such crimes against humanity, who lacks from constitutional validity, or legitimacy whatsoever (as many States justifiably fail to recognize it as the legitimate regime of Venezuela), and other actors; a “legitimizing dialogue” was started in the United Mexican States, by initiative of the Kingdom of Norway, with claimed potential recognition of such, and the reduction of the sanctions, by the United States of America, the European Union, and Canada.
For further information you can read in Spanish: Cubazuela: ¿soberana tierra del renovado dragón redgringo pitimoscovita?; and in English: Venezuela: is Guaidó’s rise to power constitutionally unsound or is the presence of Russian military specialists a “material” imposition and/or occupation of alias Cubazuela?
N.B.: The issue of the Republic of Venezuela, (i.e., as the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela fails to exist), is, logically, the same hypothesis, (i.e., the other side of the same coin), as with Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar Gaddafi, (whose defense was that he held no constitutional bond with the State, just that in this case of the Republic of Venezuela, the issue is that the “constitution” itself is against the Constitution, hence the whole “constitution” is illegitimate (moreover is Nicolas Maduro Moros, who even betrayed that “constitution” (since was “’unconstitutionally’” imposed, and since “’unconstitutionally’” remains imposed (with all the against humanity criminal conducts that had to occur (and that are occurring in the present moment) for it to happen, and for it to persist))); in the way him, Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar Gaddafi, pitched his large bedouin tent in a no-camping area in Manhattan, to give a speech in the name of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, (i.e., today the State of Libya), as pointed in this piece; all in the sense the United Nations (UN) provided Nicolas Maduro Moros the right to attend the UN, even the United States of America (USA) has imposed sanctions since the Constitution was “substituted” in a fraudulent way, as by the time it occurred, (that Nicolas Maduro Moros attended the UN), they did not recognize the de-facto de-facto regime. All in the ways, actions, and by reason of the valid arguments hereunto exposed.