Electoral Agreement Highlights Venezuela’s Institutional Crisis

The proposal by Venezuela’s ruling party for an unconditional agreement to accept the results of the upcoming presidential elections highlights the country’s deep institutional crisis, says political consultant Giulio Cellini.

The proposal from the Chavista regime to sign an agreement for unconditional support of the results of the upcoming presidential elections on July 28 underscores the severe institutional crisis Venezuela faces, according to lawyer and political consultant Giulio Cellini.

This idea was put forth by the official campaign team and reiterated on several occasions by Nicolás Maduro, who has expressed his readiness for the National Electoral Council (CNE) to call him to sign such an agreement. The CNE, a key institution in Venezuela’s electoral process, has not yet commented on the proposal. The majority opposition distrusts this proposal, despite Maduro’s argument that of the 30 elections, his party has won 28, and therefore, an agreement to recognize the electoral bulletin read by the CNE on the night of July 28, announcing the results, would prevent accusations of fraud.

The Controversial Proposal

So far, the electoral body has not commented on the call for candidates to sign an agreement, although candidate Luis Eduardo Martínez announced he would attend this Thursday. In response to the proposal, Cellini told EFE that it is “unheard of” to sign a document to respect voting results. However, he also highlighted the potential benefits of the proposal, such as preventing accusations of fraud and rebuilding trust in the electoral process. The proposal, if accepted and implemented effectively, could significantly improve the transparency and credibility of the electoral process in Venezuela.

“This shows the severity of the institutional situation in Venezuela. That a proposal for recognizing the result needs to be made, regardless of who it comes from, is the first peculiarity, not to say madness, of our environment,” he said.

The Barbados Agreement

Cellini pointed out that instead of preparing a new agreement, Venezuelan political actors should resume the already signed Barbados Agreement. This agreement, signed in October by the government and the opposition group in the Democratic Unity Platform (PUD), is an “important” instrument with international backing. It commits the parties to provide and respect electoral guarantees, including broad international observation. However, its implementation has been challenging, particularly the establishment of a monitoring commission to oversee compliance.

Cellini explained that this agreement was to be developed by both parties and even establish a commission to monitor its compliance, but this has not been possible. He also noted that although Maduro’s administration and the PUD signed the Barbados Agreement, it provides guarantees for all political parties and other candidates outside these two major blocs. “It’s not just for a group of the opposition, it’s for the whole country… the beneficiaries of that agreement are the entire national political dynamic, but also the citizens,” he added.

Criticism and Acceptance

Maduro, seeking his third consecutive term, says he is willing to sign an agreement, while the other nine candidates debate the pertinence of a document supporting the electoral results. The Movement for Socialism (MAS) party, supporting PUD candidate Edmundo González Urrutia, has suggested the need for an agreement, which could be promoted by the CNE, with a majority of Chavista board members, including its president, Elvis Amoroso. The proposal for an agreement, if accepted, could significantly impact the electoral process and the country’s political landscape, particularly in terms of trust and transparency.

Opposition candidate Antonio Ecarri expressed his willingness to sign an agreement, provided there is a debate among the presidential candidates first, a proposal to which the ruling party has yet to respond. José Brito, another candidate claiming to be opposition, believes that in a “normal country,” there would be no need for agreements to recognize electoral results. Meanwhile, González Urrutia, a candidate supported by the Movement for Socialism (MAS) party, criticized the Venezuelan president’s idea, arguing that he has already violated the Barbados Agreement. “Sign an agreement for what? The government is the first to violate the agreements they sign; we have the Barbados agreements, which have remained dead letters,” the former ambassador told journalists.

Meanwhile, González Urrutia criticized the Venezuelan president’s idea, arguing that he has already violated the Barbados Agreement. “Sign an agreement for what? The government is the first to violate the agreements they sign; we have the Barbados agreements, which have remained dead letters,” the former ambassador told journalists.

The Institutional Crisis

The call for an agreement to accept the election results highlights the fragile state of Venezuela’s democratic institutions. The situation underscores the deep mistrust between the government and the opposition, exacerbated by years of political turmoil and economic collapse. The need for such an agreement reflects a lack of faith in the electoral process and the institutions responsible for overseeing it.

The Barbados Agreement, signed with much fanfare, was supposed to ensure a fair and transparent electoral process. However, its implementation needs to be improved. The failure to establish a monitoring commission to oversee compliance with the agreement points to the challenges in achieving political consensus in Venezuela’s highly polarized environment.

The international community is vested in the outcome of Venezuela’s elections. The country’s political stability is crucial for the region, and international observers closely watch the developments. The call for international observation in the Barbados Agreement was a step towards ensuring transparency, but the current situation raises questions about the effectiveness of these measures. International observers, who play a crucial role in ensuring the integrity of the electoral process, have not yet commented on the proposal for an agreement, but their views are likely to be influential in shaping the debate.

A Path Forward

For Venezuela to move forward, rebuilding trust in its institutions is essential. Despite its flaws, the Barbados Agreement holds the potential to provide a framework for electoral guarantees that could significantly restore credibility to the process. However, this requires a genuine commitment from all parties to respect the agreement and work towards its full implementation.

The upcoming elections are not just another event in Venezuela’s political calendar, but a critical test for its democracy. The outcome will not only determine the country’s leadership for the following term but also set a precedent for future electoral processes. Ensuring these elections are conducted fairly and transparently is not just important, but crucial for the country’s democratic future.

Giulio Cellini’s observations highlight the importance of returning to the principles laid out in the Barbados Agreement. This requires political will from both the government and the opposition to engage constructively and prioritize the country’s democratic health over partisan interests. The international community, which has a vested interest in Venezuela’s political stability, can be supportive in this process, but the primary responsibility lies with Venezuela’s political leaders. Their commitment to the agreement and their ability to work together will be crucial in determining its success.

Also read: Antichavista Unity Crucial for Post-Election Stability in Venezuela

The call for an unconditional agreement to accept the election results underscores Venezuela’s deep institutional crisis. The Barbados Agreement offers a path forward, but its success depends on the genuine commitment of all parties involved. The upcoming elections are crucial for Venezuela’s democracy, and ensuring their integrity is paramount for the country’s future stability and democratic health.