Law and Justice under a Dictatorial Regime:
The Political Nature of the Criminal Investigation against Edmundo González Urrutia

By Dante Alighieri (pseud.)

 

"Livid, even where shame emerges, the sorrowful shadows were on the ice, chattering their teeth like a stork." Dante Aligheri (Inferno, Canto XXXII, verses 34-36)

15 September 2024

 

Law and justice are two extremely important concepts for the development of our life in society. These terms date back to the beginning of our existence as social and conscious beings, and affect our lives even before we are born. However, in today's Venezuela, these foundations have been distorted and are applied arbitrarily. This inadequate application and procedural malpractice cause deep discomfort in any jurist.

Before delving into the discussion of the research that concerns us, it is necessary to define these terms for the purposes of this article.

 

What do we understand by Law?

Law is a set of norms and institutions that regulate the external behavior of people and social coexistence, based on the principles of justice and legal security. These rules and institutions establish mechanisms to resolve legal conflicts that may arise between groups or individuals within a given jurisdiction (scope of application), and can be enforced coercively.

 

What do we understand by Justice?

Justice is the virtue that consists of giving each person what they deserve, that is, organizing society based on principles of honesty, equity and reasonableness. It is a virtue that seeks to emulate, on the earthly plane, that divine and perfect justice that only the creator can grant as the eternal destiny of souls. In that true justice, each soul receives what it deserves according to its actions, and is judged with total transparency, without the secrets, falsehoods, vulnerabilities or impurities that usually contaminate earthly justice.

 

Difference between Law and Justice

Law is not an end in itself, but a means to achieve an objective. In the scale of values, the Law does not occupy the main place; That place is occupied by Justice, which is an end in itself. The Law is only an instrument that seeks to facilitate access to Justice. Therefore, the real struggle and focus of any discussion about the regulation of conduct and social interactions, particularly in the criminal or punitive sphere, must be centered on the achievement of justice. Any regulation that prevents the achievement of justice or that unfairly persecutes innocent people is, in essence, an aberration to the very purpose of an earthly justice system. Such a system should be considered null and void by any purist jurist.

The term "jurist" comes from Latin iurista, a word that shares a root with the Latin terms for justice (justice), just enough (just) and right (ius). All of these concepts are, therefore, intrinsically linked with the aim of achieving a virtuous balance based on equity, honesty and reasonableness. It is these "jurists", like the one who writes to them, who are called to legislate, interpret and apply the law to achieve this end. However, our function is not limited exclusively to the aforementioned tasks; We also have the duty to condemn the abuses and injustices committed by those who claim to be jurists, but whose actions threaten justice itself. With this purpose I present to you the following article.

 

The Justice System in Venezuela

Currently, talking about the Venezuelan justice system generates great discomfort, since it is frequently applied against those who should not be persecuted. A clear example is the case of the president elected on July 28, 2024, the diplomat Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, who, despite having won the electoral contest with a majority of votes - a victory that reflects the popular will of millions of citizens both inside and outside Venezuela - is today persecuted as a criminal by the dictator's authoritarian system. Nicolás Maduro Moros. The latter controls and uses the Venezuelan justice system at its convenience, in contravention of the Constitution, the law and the sovereign will of the Venezuelan people.

The dictator Nicolás Maduro Moros, despite having been defeated in the elections of July 28, proclaimed himself the winner and supposed president-elect, with the support of some rectors (not all) of the National Electoral Council (CNE), including its president, Elvis Amoroso, without official election results having been published. This is something that, since the constitution of the Electoral Branch and the establishment of the CNE, has never been seen before in an electoral contest in Venezuela.

The CNE, which is the governing body in electoral matters, is currently another public administration body manipulated by Nicolás Maduro Moros. In today's Venezuela, many of the personnel who occupy high positions in public powers are corrupt officials, who have been appointed to serve the interests of the dictator and his closest circle. The separation and independence of powers in Venezuela has disappeared, concentrating all power in the hands of Nicolás Maduro Moros and his loyal followers.

For this reason, one should not trust the information bulletins that some CNE authorities showed a few hours after the electoral contest ended, since they lack any support or evidence, since the official results were never published. The Venezuelan regime refuses to show its copies of the election records, since the only true records do not confirm Nicolás Maduro Moros as winner. In the absence of verifiable and auditable official records, his re-election cannot be recognized by either Venezuelans or the international community.

In contrast, Edmund Gonzalez Urrutia, along with his platform of electoral witnesses and with the support of another candidate, the former rector of the CNE Enrique Marquez, has published copies of the minutes delivered to its team of witnesses during election day. These copies must be identical to those held by the governing party's body of witnesses, the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), and to the minutes protected by the Republic Plan, since all are issued under citizen verification at the same time during the closing of each polling station.

 

What is happening in Venezuela?

As a consequence of his electoral victory and the risk it represents for the continuity of the dictatorial regime of Nicolás Maduro Moros, the current and true president-elect, the ambassador Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, was summoned by the Public Ministry (the Venezuelan prosecutor's office) to appear before its headquarters in the city of Caracas.

The Venezuelan Public Ministry, attached to the Citizen Power, is the body in charge of analyzing alleged violations of Venezuelan criminal legislation and presenting accusations before the criminal jurisdiction against those people whose acts are considered alleged violations of the law. Likewise, the Public Ministry is responsible for presenting its arguments and evidence of the alleged crimes on behalf of the Venezuelan State before the criminal jurisdiction.

The activation of a criminal investigation procedure by the Public Ministry against Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia reflects that the dictator Nicolás Maduro Moros He also controls and manipulates this organ at will. The actions of the Public Ministry are biased in its favor, since currently the officials of this institution seem to act more as defenders of the dictator's personal interests than as prosecutors of the Republic. Therefore, I will explain precisely why the Public Prosecutor's Office is not acting in accordance with the law in the case of Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, over the course of these three articles.

It is important to mention that many of the abuses identified in the case of Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia They are also observed in the cases of protesters, human rights defenders, political opponents, journalists, lawyers, polling station members, electoral witnesses, minors and bystanders who were detained during the protests and in the days after the election, or who Today they have summonses and arrest warrants against them (cases whose analysis we will leave for another time), so this case does not represent an exception but rather one more symptom of an arbitrary and persecutory criminal justice system.

Returning to the case that concerns us, to date, the Prosecutor's Office of the Public Ministry has not been able to present valid and duly substantiated arguments, nor sufficient evidence to justify an accusation against the true president-elect for the allegedly criminal acts that they intend to attribute to him. My suspicions, shared by many other Venezuelan criminal and jurists, suggest that the true purpose of this arbitrary procedure is to disqualify Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia to hold positions in the public administration and, in this way, be able to claim that he cannot legally assume the position of president of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, since according to current Venezuelan legislation, a convicted person cannot hold said position.

 

What does the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela say about this?

According to articles 227 and 229 of the current Constitution (1999), to be president it is required:

• Be a Venezuelan citizen by birth and not have another nationality, in full enjoyment of your rights.
• Be 30 years old at the time of the election.
• Not being subject to conviction by definitively final sentence.
• Not be vice president of the Republic, minister, state governor or mayor, on the day of his nomination and on the date of the election.
• Be from a secular state (not be in full religious office).

What are the charges they intend to bring against you?

A Venezuelan judge with jurisdiction over terrorism ordered this Monday, September 2, 2024, the arrest of Edmundo González Urrutia, on the following charges:

• Usurpation of functions, article: 213 Venezuelan Penal Code (CPV)
• Forging of Public Documents, article: 319 CPV
• Instigation of Disobedience of Laws, article: 283 CPV
• Conspiracy, article: 132 CPV
• Sabotage to System Damage, article 7 of the Computer Crimes Law.
• Association, article 37 of the Organic Law Against Organized Crime and Financing of Terrorism.

For a comprehensive analysis of each charge refer to my other article about the illegality of the judicial procedure.

 

Initial observations on the Arrest Warrant

1. What does the current Venezuelan Penal Code (CPV) say?

At this point it is important to refer to two important points, the first is about the punishability of an act according to Venezuelan legislation and the second point focuses on reviewing what penalties could be applied in the case of Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia because of his age. For this purpose, it is important to know the following regulations:

 

1. 1. Regarding punishable acts:

Article 65.- It is not punishable:

1.- He who acts in fulfillment of a duty or in the legitimate exercise of a right, authority, office or position, without crossing legal limits.

Regarding imputability, in addition to being clearly innocent of the charges that are intended to be brought against him, these are totally invalid and null, since they have no punishable basis to be applied to a presidential candidate. It is important to emphasize that any Venezuelan electoral candidate has the right to peacefully claim their electoral rights and question as fraudulent the electoral results that do not coincide with the data collected by their witnesses, with the results obtained in the exit polls, or with the information provided by the national and international observers who participated in the electoral process. This is especially relevant in a scenario where the due process of publishing electoral results has not been complied with and a candidate has been proclaimed the winner without minutes or results published by the CNE. The legal avenue to challenge the results was never enabled, since the official results were never published to be challenged. Therefore, Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia He had no choice but to make his minutes public and publicly denounce the irregularities.

 

1. 1. About the penalties:

 

Article 8.- Penalties are mainly divided into corporal and non-corporal.

Article 9.- Corporal punishments, which are also called restrictive of freedom, are the following:

1.- Presidio.

2.- Prison.

3.- Arrest.

4.- Relegation to a Penal Colony.

5.- Confinement.

6.- Expulsion from the geographical space of the Republic

 

 Article 10.- Non-corporal penalties are:

1.- Subjection to the surveillance of the public authority.

2.- Civil interdiction for criminal conviction.

3.- Political disqualification.

4.- Disqualification from exercising any profession, industry or position

5.- Dismissal from employment

6.- Suspension thereof.

7.- Much.

8.- Caution not to offend or harm.

9.- Reprimand or warning.

10.- Loss of the instruments or weapons with which the punishable act was committed and the effects that come from it.

11.- Payment of procedural costs.

 

Article 75.- To those who carry out a punishable act, being over seventy years old, he will not be sentenced to prison, but instead of this and prison arrest will be applied which will not exceed four years

In relation to the applicable penalties, it is important to emphasize that the ambassador and president-elect Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia He is 75 years old. In this sense, he cannot and should not be subjected to any prison sentence, in the event that he is found guilty of the charges for which he has been charged. But house arrest and political disqualification could have been applied to him. Additionally, it is likely that in this case the Public Prosecutor's Office would have requested house arrest and a prohibition on leaving the country as precautionary measures during the procedure.

 

Political Elements that explain the Criminal Procedure initiated against Edmundo González Urrutia

 

Connection between the Summons and subsequent Arrest Order with the procedure carried out in the Electoral Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ).

After Nicolás Maduro Moros was proclaimed the winner of the elections by some directors of the CNE, accusations of fraud intensified, and demands arose for the CNE to present the minutes proving the victory of the official candidate. So far, this has not occurred, which contrasts with the minutes published by the team of Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, which showed a broad victory for him in the contest.

In the midst of the controversy and protests in the streets, which resulted in dozens of deaths and thousands of arrests, Nicolás Maduro Moros filed an appeal before the Electoral Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) to carry out “an expert opinion” of the electoral process and verify the results issued in the CNE newsletter, giving a minimum of legal legitimacy to his alleged and questioned “victory.” ” electoral.

After the appeal, the court began a process and summoned the different political forces and candidates, requiring the delivery of the electoral documentation in their possession. Edmund Gonzalez Urrutia He did not appear before the Electoral Chamber, since he does not trust the impartiality of the judicial body. He also did not hand over the originals of the electoral records that he had in his possession, for fear that they would be destroyed or lost by the Judiciary.

His refusal to participate in this mysterious and illegal process of “verification of results”, which have not even been published to date (which makes verification impossible), motivated the initiation of a criminal investigation against him as a method of intimidation by part of the authorities of the regime and in retaliation for not remaining silent and allowing the fraud to develop without problems.

It should be noted that the Attorney General of the Republic (the highest authority of the Public Ministry), the Ombudsman and the Comptroller General of the Republic also participated in this procedure before the Electoral Chamber, despite the fact that they have no jurisdiction in electoral matters or They are interested parties in the “verification” process. This reveals the collusion between different public authorities to support the electoral fraud of Nicolás Maduro Moros.

 

The procedure as a pressure factor for the negotiation of the Political Asylum Request and the departure of Edmundo González Urrutia from Venezuela

As a result of the political persecution to which it is being subjected Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, the high probability that a precautionary measure of ban on leaving the country a of house arrest, its potential disqualification politics and the lack of separation and independence of powers that can guarantee judicial avenues for the claim of his rights as the winning candidate in the July 28 contest and for his legitimate defense against this criminal procedure tainted with nullity. Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia He found it necessary to request asylum from the government of Spain and this was granted, after a negotiation between the regime and the Spanish government in which former President Zapatero allegedly played an important role, with Edmundo González Urrutia leaving Venezuela in the early morning of September 8 on a Spanish Air Force plane. This fact reinforces the seriousness of the situation that exists today in Venezuela, the lack of procedural guarantees and the collusion of Public Powers to keep Nicolás Maduro Moros in power against the will and popular sovereignty.

Additionally, this criminal investigation has been closed by the Public Ministry in accordance with statements of Tarek William Saab, the Attorney General of the Republic and that the departure of Edmundo González has been announced by Delcy Rodriguez, the Vice President of the Republic, further reinforce the thesis that the sole purpose of this procedure was to hinder the ability of Venezuelan civil society and the true president-elect to fight for the recognition of the electoral results of July 28 in order to begin to the political transition that demands popular sovereignty.

 

To conclude regarding the Political Character

What Venezuela is experiencing today, an environment of corruption, concentration of power, authoritarian dictatorship and persecution, not only represents a spiritual war between good and evil; It is a fight of democrats against authoritarians and of jurists against injustice.

There is no doubt that the purpose of this procedure is to perpetuate the dictatorship of Nicolás Maduro in power through the persecution and disqualification of the person who emerged victorious in the electoral contest.

As a jurist, my responsibility is to continue ensuring that in Venezuela a standard of earthly justice is achieved as close as possible to true justice and to this end it is vital to denounce the political, unjust and persecutory nature of this procedure. However, even if justice is not restored in Venezuela, we Venezuelans maintain the faith that pure and divine justice will reach those who today abuse their power and keep our country in the dark.

The voices of the Venezuelan people resounded on July 28, calling for an end to arbitrariness, corruption and human rights violations. Therefore, I trust that soon our beloved and beautiful country will be free again! Our fight, that of those of us who wish for good, that of the democrats and that of the jurists, is UNTIL THE END.

 

To learn more about the illegality of the criminal investigation continue reading HERE.

To learn more about the partiality of the actors involved in the criminal investigation continue reading HERE.