Tuesday, October 11, 2005

The not so Supreme Court A couple of days ago I reported how the National Assembly was considering expropriating the Coca Cola plant because supposedly Panamco had not paid fired workers what they were due. Today I learn that the Court's have actually resolved the issue. In fact, according to today's Universal it was the Supreme Court, which in 2004 ruled that the workers' demands were not warranted. Then yesterday I reported how a person democratically elected to the city council of the municipality of Sucre in Caracas, was never reinstated to his elected position despite the Supreme Court saying that he could not be removed. Well, today I read that the Supreme Court ruled that the Santa Rita farm had been taken over illegally by the Government and had to be returned to its rightful owners. But this does not seem to help them, as the Head of the Land Institute (INTI) said on Saturday that the Court's decision was simply a technicality and that the people who had taken over the land were doing productive activities and would be protected by INTI. He also said that he did not discard that the cooperative working the land would leave one day and return the next with new papers gving them th rights over it. Well, it seems like they are going to have to remove the word Supreme from the Court as nobody in this Government seems to take it seriously or have any idea that Supreme means the highest ranking authority in the land. So much for the rule of law in the not so pretty revolution! 10:55:35 PM    comment []

Who is on first? Last week the Electoral Board's (CNE) President Jorge Rodriguez gave a press conference in which he came very close to accusing the opposition for the killing of the CNE representative in Amazonas state. This man was taken from his Hotel at gunpoint, driven in a car and then knifed to death. The whole thing was a little bit too much, Rodriguez was calling for the military to begin the operation that protects the electoral process, as this is the second CNE representative killed this year. While Rodriguez was making the accusations, saying that attacks of the Electoral power had to stop, the investigative police (CICPC) was saying that this appeared to be a robbery by common criminals. I decided not to write about it, thinking that Rodriguez was simply shocked at the news. Well this morning the Prosecutor makes statements saying that this is indeed a robbery and not a political crime and he can "responsibly say that up to this point the investigations do not suggest such a motive but it is a common crime". But then he says that the investigative police have been removed from the investigation because "some officers may have participated in the crime". I said: Waaaaaait. This was a "common" crime committed by officers of the investigative police? Is this a common crime? Just a couple of hours later, the Minister of the Interior and Justice who happens to be the boss of the investigative police comes out and says that it has been ruled out that it is a crime of passion and it is either a political crime or it was done for economic reasons. He then rambles about how the dead CNE officer imposed supervision which eliminated "corruption" in electoral activities in that state and that once "profits" disappeared from electoral activities, some groups tried to "displace" him to "regain" control. He even says that they tried to simulate a robbery to hide the true objective. Hold it! Can someone explain to me how you make money within the electoral process? This is not political? How is this a common crime? Why does the Prosecutor, who is the one that is supposed to substantiate crimes, say it is a common crime, while the Minister of Interior and Justice says the opposite just hours later? What is going on within the Government? Why the charges and countercharges? Is this public infighting? It just reminds of the Marx brothers movie when they asked:Who is on first? Truly, who is on first? (Note added: Somebody noted that this is a line from the Stooges, I guess I was thinking of Why a duck? Will leave it as posted, but I stand corrected. Correction to the correction: I guess I can't shoot straight the comment said that it was Abbot and Costello and I switched it once again this time to the Stooges. I guess it was not from I love Lucy for sure. Sorry guys) 9:38:22 PM    comment []