We commend the following post on Hugo Chavez by Gustavo Coronel.

If we consider the fact that democracy has four legs to hold it up.....any time one or more is disabled/dysfunctioned.....the whole thing tips.

Chavez has cut all 4 legs of democracy out from under his seat of power, and is spreading his canard daily like a cancer.

Coronel is too kind to suggest that the morally and financially bankrupt OAS, ruled by Chavez's pal, Insulza could actually wake up and stand for something.

We can hope that someone performs a useful and legitimate exercise as some have initiated at Hacia ersonName w:st="on" ProductID="la Seguridad-Imperio">la Seguridad-ImperioersonName> de ersonName w:st="on" ProductID="la Ley">la LeyersonName> and Friends of Rule of Law in Ecuador, Inc.....which is to actually review and study many of the Chavez contracts. 

We maintain that this will be an educational and informative tool which is long overdue and one which has been irresponsibly silenced in the current rush to legitimize the illegitimate and praise Chavez and his corrupt regime, making sure that we are enjoined to enable this dire situation.

These are not contracts in a normative sense but always carry geopolitical commitments and commitments to never ever disclose the terms/total opacity as well as total refusal to gain actual justice of the Chavez contract is not carried out. That is....Chavez's contracts tell the contractee that only a Chavez-placed "judge" of unknown quality will determine any disputes.

All Chavez contracts that have been reviewed carry a mandate that all signatories are to engage in total silence ...penalty threats notwithstanding for transparency! When we say that Chavez is corrupt, we say this with certainty having performed actual studies of his contracts and instruments of government collusion for his commandeering of a centrist authoritarian klepocracy engineered at total mineral controls in this hemisphere to assist the Russo-Iranian energy axis controls.

These so called contracts are so outrageous one ponders why any would be so stupid to sign them. One also has to ponder why no one has ever once focused on the instruments of deception and fraud installation. All attempts to date to reveal the corrupting nature of Chavez's ` rule of law' [ which is the antithesis of rule of law] are laughed at and scoffed or simply.....cancelled for fear of offending or by those who jealously guard their prerogatives to enjoin the Chavez sweep. 

But sign these contracts, some do. These are contracts that any legitimate U.S. public corporation could not sign due to the very illegal nature of the language: the company itself could be sued by its shareholders for committing crimes by the very inking of the deal, if one chose to so examine.....which is why Chavez does not do much business with legal entities which require transparency, contract review, and contract enforcement....aka rule of law. Or legitimate North Americans, preferring the murkuy, the opaque, the offshore, and the clandestine.

Actual Chavez contract language in a side by side will help expose the structural corruption.

All support for actual anti corruption rule of law reform efforts in the Andes have been  killed off by funding theft by competing contractors, corrupt program managers, ideologues, and inept foolishness. This has helped break the will of reformers who have, with so many today, thrown in the towel as one by one the pillars of democracy fall and the domino nations fall too under the lure of corruption-as-power.

We say- rebuild the pillars. Reform the lines as courage fails and dignity runs. Only this time, stop the corruption and the wordsmithing and gamesmanship by incompetent, murky, self serving and corrupted actors. Alternative democracy does not work. Alternative rule of law does not work either unless it is at the point of a gun. We all- all of us- deserve better as nothing in support of any reforms or progress is underway

-Juan Ponce de Leon

----------------------- 

Venezuelatoday

Chávez, corruption and the OAS
(a second memo to the OAS)
By Gustavo Coronel
December 22, 2006

In March 1996 the Organization of American States adopted the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption. Ten years later it seems painfully apparent that this instrument has not remedied the high levels of corruption prevailing among its member states. In fact, with the exception of Chile, El Salvador, Costa Rica and Uruguay, countries that have always been perceived as relatively less corrupt, most other countries in Latin America have become more corrupt during the last ten years, as perceived by the organization Transparency International. Some of the countries have simply collapsed, such as Bolivia and Venezuela. Bolivia was placed 36 in 1990 in the ranking of Transparency International while today it's placed at 105. Venezuela was ranked 48 in 1996 while today it's ranked at 138. Both in relative terms and in absolute measurements these countries are in a free fall in all aspects related to honesty in government and in business. Declines are also apparent in Mexico, Brazil and, less so, in Colombia. It seems clear that the convention has not produced an improvement in the manner Latin American countries have managed the problem of corruption.

Why is this so? Basically because it cannot be enforced. Although the convention is a valuable compendium of all the potential manifestations of corruption in member states it is simply unusable to enforce honest and transparent practices in those member states. The reason is that corrupt practices in Latin America are almost always initiated within  government structures, in the bureaucracy of those countries. They exist because government institutions are weak, controls are lax or inexistent and political leadership is insincere about wanting to curtail corrupt practices or incapable of keeping his followers in line. When this happens, the OAS cannot act unless the state requests it. But, how can a member state ask for action against corruption, if corruption is being practiced by the state itself, if the main political and bureaucratic representatives of the state are involved, through commission or omission, in the practices of corruption?

The Inter-American Convention Against Corruption says in its preamble that the member states are "convinced" that corruption undermines legitimacy, that democracy "requires the combating of every form of corruption," that fighting corruption "strengthens democratic institutions" and that the states are "responsible to hold corrupt persons accountable… and to cooperate with one another for their efforts in this area to be effective." It goes on, article by article, to ask for efforts by the states and for cooperation among states to fight against corruption. It defines corruption in terms which leaves no doubt as to what corruption means: (a), the incorrect, dishonorable and improper fulfillment of public functions, (b), illicit enrichment, (c), lack of biding practices in government contracting, (d), impunity and complicity in the commission of corrupt acts, and, (e) bribery and extortion, transnational bribery. Corruption and illegal flows of money, says the convention very specifically, cannot hide behind bank secrecy rules.

What can the OAS do, then, when a member state violates practically every component of the preamble and every article of the convention? This is the case of the government of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela. However, the corrupt Hugo Chavez government itself will never make the call for action against the Hugo Chavez corrupt government. Few political regimes commit suicide. At the same time, other member states will not ask for action against the corrupt Chavez regime unless this corruption becomes a threat to their own welfare or national interests. In fact, a significant portion of Chavez's corruption, the donation of significant amounts of Venezuelan money to other Latin American countries or leaders in an effort to buy their political loyalties, or the illicit manipulations in the acquisition of foreign bonds, might be perceived as "beneficial" by some of the countries involved. Why should they call for action? The only victims of Hugo Chavez's corruption are the people of Venezuela. Why should anyone care?

And yet, the spirit of the OAS is violated if the peoples of the hemisphere cannot be defended against their domestic enemies. Somehow the OAS has to find the way to act against a government that is causing great damage to the society it governs (or, more properly in the Venezuelan case, it rules). When all political institutions in a country have been co-opted by the executive power and checks and balances disappear, when the officers in charge of controlling the government become mere appendages of the executive power, when no citizen can demand impartial justice, where can citizens go in search of justice and action against the hyper corruption active within the governments which should protect their interests?

The OAS should create an Inter-American Commission for Anti-Corruption, similar to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, so that citizens of the hemisphere can find a place to address their complaints. Corruption is often a collective offense, harming the interests of society as a whole. The misuse and illegal appropriation of the national wealth of any country impoverishes all society, corrupts the mechanisms of justice and end up by promoting national poverty, not only individual poverty. As a Venezuelan citizen I feel aggrieved by the high levels of corruption present in the Hugo Chavez regime, not so much because they threaten my personal well-being but because they threaten the well-being of all Venezuelan society. The OAS is an organization of States and, as such, is proving ineffective to solve the main problems of the peoples of the hemisphere. Let us try to make it into an organization of Nations, so that the well being of the peoples of those nations can be fully included in their processes of decision-making.

To the extent that international organizations cannot address the real problems of the population and restrict themselves to protecting the interests of their member governments or to being clubs of well paid bureaucrats, usually enjoying material and spiritual standards much higher than those prevailing in their own countries, there will be no incentives for them to do something effective on behalf of the peoples.

I will try in the very near future to introduce before the OAS a request for effective action against the rampant corruption going on in Venezuela. The obvious question that I would be asked is: why don't you do it in Venezuela? This question has an obvious answer: Denouncing corruption in Venezuela is a waste of time and carries a personal risk that, if at all possible, I would like to avoid. There are over 13,000 murders taking place every year in Venezuela and 90% or more of these deaths go unpunished and, even, without investigation. Human life is too valuable to become an insignificant statistic.

© 2006 Gustavo Coronel