Yesterday (December 23, 2004), I got two emails from an interested reader to my recent commentary on the Venezuelan judiciary, published in VHeadline.com, entitled "Balance of United States' power ore Venezuela's rule of law."

The emails pose the important question of the alleged "control" of Chavez over the legislature, thus, impugning the separation of powers within Venezuelan democracy.

Here's the first email.

"Weren't the existing TS members appointed by the NA during the Constituent

Assembly in 1999? Weren't Chavez's congressmen who appointed the TS members?" ask the interested reader.

This was my reply.

No. The National Assembly of Venezuela (or the "AN") in 1999 indeed appointed the existing court, that is, until the 17 new judges were sworn in last week. But Chavez' supporters in the AN did not appoint the existing court, as defined.

In 1999 the Congress, more so than now, contained Chavez' opponents as well as his supporters.

In 1999, Congress split the court down the middle ... 10 judges were Chavez' supporters and 10 were opponents.

i.e. Gridlock.

What you want to self-servingly do is to equate all or a great majority of the 1999 "congressmen" with Chavez' supporters, then blame Chavez for what you say are the actions of his own "AB."  I've seen worst tricks ... but you better try something else.

The interested reader found my reply incredulous.

"You got to be kidding me. Chavez controlled 125 seats in the AN back in 1999. So it was the government supporters in the AN who elected the current members of the TSJ.  It wasn't up until Chavez started showing his autocratic and totalitarian attitude that even his own political mentor, Miquilena, and others clearly saw the nature of the beast and decided to abandon his side. So Chavez support in the AN lost 42 backers ... which now amounts to only 83 backers, I wonder why?"

Here's my reply to the second email.

Your arithmetic, interested reader, is more bizarre than your argument.

The first election of deputies to the new National Assembly took place on 30 July 2000.

The results were as follows:

The "control" which you see is only your fantasy.

I'm eager to read how you will fantasize 80 seats out of 165, not 125 as you confidently imagine, into "control," of the NA.

Though less bizarre than your arithmetic, your argument nonetheless bears a strange twist. The deputies, or "congressmen" as you sometimes would have it, who support Chavez were elected by their constituents, not Chavez, and these assembly members represent their constituents, not Chavez.

In fact, even you, laboring under your bizarre arithmetic, concede that some of Chavez' supporters have from time to time switch sides, further demonstrating that the alleged "control" which Chavez reportedly exercises over the AN is nothing but a fantasy.

You sadly infer from the support that a deputy gives to Chavez that Chavez "controls" the assembly member ... you clearly overlook the coincidence of interests between Chavez' policies and the welfare of the member's constituents.

Perhaps you confound the National Assembly of Venezuela with the US Congress where the GOPs ... who enjoy a majority in both houses of the legislature ... are unswervingly obsequious to the so-called American president, Bush, the commander-in-thief who stole the 2004 presidential election.

Arthur Shaw
belial4444@aol.com

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=24052