Government campaign Nicolas Maduro for him Advisory referendum The consultation process began in Essequibo Province on Monday, November 6, amid calls from Chavismo to depoliticize the issue, doubts about some of the questions raised for consultation, and rejection by some political and civil society spokesmen.
Doubts arise specifically about Questions 3 and 5He also objected to it Government of GuyanaAlthough it is not a referendum with binding results, some experts suggest that it could have some negative effects on the territorial dispute and trial currently underway in the country. international justice Court (international justice Court).
The referendum will be conducted according to schedule National Electoral Council (CNE) on December 3, 2023. Opinions were divided between voting “yes” because the defense of Essequibo does not recognize political differences, and those calling for a vote but “no” because of the seriousness of the above-mentioned questions, and those calling for a vote “no.” “No” because of the seriousness of the above-mentioned questions. Like the former university president Andres Bello Catholic University (UCAB), Luis Ugalde, prefer to abstain because they consider this type of consultation unnecessary.
What about question 3?
Do you agree with Venezuela’s historical position of not recognizing the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice to resolve the territorial dispute over… Guyana Esquipa? Raises question 3.
Consult him Kokuyo effectUN activist Gerson Revanales pointed out that it is not historically true that Venezuela does not recognize the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice, because he suggested on three occasions, as he said, resorting to it.
He stated that the first time the British government rejected it, then Venezuela also relied on Article 33 of the United Nations Charter to support the judicial process. In this sense, he warned that the question is being asked of the population under a false premise.
“Venezuela has recognized the jurisdiction of the court, and what is stated in the question is incorrect, and the fact that the court summons has been heard, which… Delcy Rodriguez “This (November 2022) came to reject Guyana’s request to recognize the award and to have legal representation in the next trial, and this means that it recognizes jurisdiction,” the retired professional ambassador said.
The ICJ summoned Venezuela and Guyana on November 14, after Guyana requested interim measures to prevent the consultative referendum from taking place until the court decides the issue. Arbitration award. Regarding the ongoing trial, Venezuela must submit its counter-brief (arguments) on April 8, 2024.
“Regardless of this referendum, the court will continue the trial, and the judges will conduct their investigations but will not do the work of Venezuela. If the representative of Venezuela withdraws from the trial, we will be left without the right of appeal, and we will continue to shout that the sun shines in Essequibo, but the United Nations and the countries will recognize the court’s decision if it is in Guyana’s favour. Refanalis added.
Is it a blank check?
For her internationalist colleague, Lauren Caballero, a yes vote on Question 3 gives the government a blank check. Abandoning the judicial process Before the International Court of Justice, which will have very negative consequences for the territorial dispute because the court declared itself competent and its rulings will be binding on Venezuela.
“It is sensitive for the government to transfer state responsibility to the Venezuelan people, without first explaining the ramifications of a negative or positive response. If Venezuelans answer yes to question #3, they are giving the government a blank check not to show up to defend our rights in court, so the responsibility for not showing up will not fall on the government but rather on us. Those who vote yes there.”
In an interview with GlobovisionThe expert in international politics and democracy stressed that when faced with this question, a citizen who knows that Essequibo is from Venezuela will vote “no,” because the executive authority bears the responsibility, as he stressed, of forming a “solid and armored force” of defense, to ensure that Venezuela emerges in the best possible way. directed at that trial, instead of attacking the International Court of Justice.
Indeed, it is the court, which must rule on the validity Jury Prize of 1899 The court, which allocates the Essequibo region to Guyana, recently warned: “According to the plaintiff, the aim of this referendum is to obtain answers that support Venezuela’s decision to abandon the current procedure before the court and resort instead to unilateral measures in order to ‘solve’ the problem. The controversy surrounding the formal annexation of Guyana and the incorporation of the entire territory in question into Venezuela.
On November 6, the First Deputy Chairman of the Government Party (Pesov), God gave poetry He said that the lack of impartiality is an excuse to ignore the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. He stressed that the ruling against Venezuela is “already ready,” because the judges were also in the past lawyers for transnational oil companies that want to exploit resources in Essequibo.
What is the seriousness of question 5?
Do you agree to the establishment of the State of Guiana Esquipa and the development of an expedited plan for the comprehensive care of the current and future inhabitants of that region, which includes, among other things, the granting of citizenship and a Venezuelan identity card, in accordance with the provisions of international law? Geneva Convention And international law, and thus the inclusion of the aforementioned country on the map of Venezuelan territory?, is Question No. 5.
“We will also give the government a second blank check to do Illegal actions“From the point of view of international law, in a region that unfortunately, as a result of the arbitration farce of 1899, we are not managing in a sovereign manner as we should,” Caballero warned.
Refanalis noted that it was also irresponsible to consult the population on a measure such as annexing the region in question to another state, which he warned would not be practically possible unless done by military force. In this sense, he stressed that no country or organization will recognize Venezuelan sovereignty over territories seized by force.
“Will it be a virtual state? Will only the lines be removed from the map or does that mean they will enter the area with tanks? Is that what’s behind this question? Will it be like what happened when Hussein invaded Kuwait to annex it or for some kind of Palestinian state? A state cannot be created without sovereignty and the assistance of a population, and once it is declared, the territorial dispute will not be resolved.”
Both Cabeiro and Rivanales agree that the solution is to defend Essequibo in court, with a good team of lawyers and experts with a specific strategy, so there is no justification for leaving this responsibility in the hands of Venezuelans with a referendum.
“The International Court of Justice decides based on the evidence submitted to it, in accordance with the law. “If this evidence is not presented to him, and if the defense is weak, he could decide against Venezuela.”
“Music buff. Social media lover. Web specialist. Analyst. Organizer. Travel trailblazer.”