Tuesday, November 26, 2002

Correction on when a referendum may take place So that there is no confusion, Antonio Guzman-Blanco put a comment in his original reply to the Oxford Human Rights Seminar correcting his understanding of when a recall referendum may take place. I think it deserves better visbility to make sure the information is correct, since the objective of this blog is to provide as accurate information as we can possibly obtain. Note that Antonio is not a lawyer, his information was from what he considered a good source. (What a contrast to the Chavez Government, we even recognize it when we are wrong, no?). This is the clarification: Subsequent to my reply to the International Human Rights Seminar, it came to my attention that I was in error when I stated that the earliest possible date for a recall referendun was 10th January 2004 and not 19th August 2003. I was also mistaken when I stated that a decision by the Venezuelan Supreme Court established that Hugo Chavez' Presidential term commenced on 10th January 2001. In fact, the Venezuelan Supreme Court issued not one, but two decisions, dated 5th April 2001 and 16th May 2001 respectively, both of which state that his Presidential term commenced on 19th August 2000 and will end on 10th January 2007. Although the decisions do not specify which date corresponds to the "mid-term" for the purpose of convening a recall referendum, it appears that 19th August 2003 is probably correct. I apologize for the confusion that my previous statement may have caused. Antonio Guzmán-Blanco 12:24:46 AM    comment []

Friday, October 25, 2002

Dr. Pepper's Justice by Jaime Requena (Not a soft-drink article) From Today's El Nacional an article by Jaime Requena Dr. Pepper's Justice On October 17th. President Chavez announced from the city of Oxford that he had designated Dr. William Pepper, Director of the International Human Rights Seminar of that University as Head of his commission to study the events in April. To that effect, the American lawyer was invited to start his work with a visit to the country starting next November 5th. There are abundant reasons to think that Dr. Pepper is not the ideal person to carry out an independent and impartial investigation of those crimes, which Venezuelan society has been clamoring for. They have nothing to do with his ideological conceptions or his academic credentials. The objection has to do with the objectivity that Dr. Pepper has shown in those matters relating to the analisis of the actions of the Government of Hugo Chavez Frias and the imprudence of namingm someone, for such a delicate position, without consultation or approval of other more interested in knowning the truth. Last week, many, among those the writer of these lines, saw our efforts to raise our voice of protest in front of the academic community of Oxford for the nomination of Hugo Chavez Frias as a speaker on human rights simply bypassed. The moderators of the forum led by Dr. Pepper, rejected our electronic messages of protest and in a gesture that says very little about their proclaimed respect for freedom of speech, they made all possible efforts to block public access to their electronic forum, filtering only those that showed backing for the official initiative. This is given as background as a live example of the impartiality that, we are sure, will dominate the conduct of Dr. Pepper. However, as if this small story were not sufficient, I invite the readers to look at the rest of said statement, justifying the invitation of President Chavez to speak at Oxford, which is an apology for the law of the funnel and an ode to the epic statistics of those that have seen the light in the command of the revolution. It forgives Chavez for his coup on February 4th. 1992 on the basis of a legitimate right that assisted him to rebel militarily, from the moment he was convinced that public institutions were rotten by corruption. Today, when a large part of the population covets an equal sentiment, not only about the Presidency and those that surround it, but about the new public powers and thousands of other things, Dr. Pepper condenms as coupsters the civic protests of the opposition and qualifies them as insignificant, when he compares them with the magnitude of the attendance to the mass acts convoked by the Government, a matter which he appears to be the only one to see. Much like our President, in his virtual Sunday program, Dr. Pepper ends blaming the local media for broadcasting the social, economic and political malaise, which should not exist, since according to him, the levels of indebtness and the standard of living have never been better. Since this is the way things are, it is obvious that Dr. Pepper, having already taken sides, would never be able to issue a just and impartial judgement about the actions and conduct of the Chief of State. And that, in my opinion, disqualifies him from judging who was responsible for each of the visceral massacres of the month of April. Finally, with that designation our Chief of State ends recognizing that neither the legislators nor justice work. As a Venezuelan, I am interested in learning the reasons that could assist the members of the Supreme Court to allow Dr. Pepper to act as their replacement. 7:45:46 AM    comment []

Thursday, October 24, 2002

Response to the International Human Rights Seminar of Oxford University While I did not want to prepare a proper response to the statement made by the International Human Rights Seminar of Oxford University, Antonio Guzman-Blanco and Anibal Romero have taken the painstaking task of replying in detail to the statement. The response is included within the Requena Files and shows the poor knowledge of said Seminar about Venezuelan issues and the huge mistake in judgement that represented the invitation of Hugo Chavez to speak at a reputable Seminar on Human Rights. Once again I challenge the IHRS to deny recieving any donation or contribution from the Venezuelan Government or any Government institution.  6:41:19 AM    comment []

Response to the Human Rights Seminar (IHRS) statement of Oxford University   Reference is made to the International Human Rights Seminar (“IHRS”) statement dated Monday, 14th October, 2002 which was issued in preparation for the visit of President Hugo Chavez Frias on Thursday, 17th October 2002 to the University of Oxford.   The IHRS statement begins as follows:       6:30:19 AM    comment []

Friday, October 18, 2002

Dr. William F. Pepper International Human Rights Seminar Centre for Socio-Legal Studies Oxford University Dear Sir,          I am still waiting a proper response to a letter I sent on October 16th to Mr Ranty Islam, I presume a spokeman of your Centre, asking to make public and post on your web site, the apology that Centre for Socio Legal Studies had sent me. I consider that the private communication issued is totally insuficient in view of the fact that the Centre for Socio-legal studies had publicly offended me by posting on your web site an slanderous statment accusing me of having impersonated the condition of Professor of Latin American Studies of the University of Cambridge, a post that it is known I held during the academic year 1994. Thus, once more, I demmand the satisfaction that I have requested as a matter of justice by copying below the abovementioned letter.          Yours sincerely,          Jaime Requena, Sc.D. (Cantab)          former Professor of Latin American Studies of Cambridge University 7:31:31 AM    comment []

Wednesday, October 16, 2002

The next Requena reply Mr Ranty Islam International Human Rights Seminar Centre for Socio-Legal Studies Oxford University Dear Sir,          I acknowledge your e-mail extending apologies on behalf of the Centre of Socio-Legal Studies of the University of Oxford, for the offensive statement against my person posted on your web site. As you are aware, the slanderous statement was seen for quite a number of persons. To mjention only one, I learnt about it, only after Professor Simon Keynes of Trinity College, Cambridge, alerted me as he complained to the authorities of Oxford University via e-mail. A copy of its message is attached for your examination to keep a record of the original text posted in your web page.          Being this the case and in need of reparation and satisfaction since the sole email is not sufficient for me, I demand, as it is customary, that you post in the same web page a proper note of apology, next to your call for the Statement regarding President Chavez seminar. Only a gesture like the one requested, that reaches the public that saw your slanderous statement against my person, could be considered by myself, sufficient and compensatory to clear my name of any misconception about my academic qualifications and personal honesty regarding expressions of beliefs that your statement might have produced in its readers.          Regarding your technical excuse of confusing IP addresses for e-mails received at your Centre, as you can imagine it is very little what I can do to help you explain the blunder since I am not an expert on IP networking. Whenever I log into forums or send e-mails and to avoid misunderstandings, I clearly identify myself, as you are aware I did in dealing with your Centre. I, like very many Venezuelans, use the Internet service provided by CANTV and I normally log from a computer on a public or university site. Given the fact that many people in my country share public Internet connections, you should be more careful when drawing conclusions based upon the questionable belief that IP addresses are unique in Venezuela. This mistake that lead you to assume that I was not whom I say I was, is the best example of how superficially you know issues of my country. If the factual support for your decision to invite Hugo Chavez Frías was based upon the same type of superficial analysis shown in my case, then no wonder that you are bound to blunder with this seminar.   At 10/16/02 / 12:13 PM, you wrote: >Dear Professor Requena, > >On behalf of the International Human Rights Seminar at the Centre for >Socio-Legal Studies, I am writing to extend our sincere apologies to you >for the offence that the statement on our www page may have caused. > >You will have noticed that the statement your complaint referred to, has >been withdrawn from the www page and in fact this was done immediately >after we had received your email. > >Please allow me to explain the context in which this matter has arisen: > >On Saturday, 12 October at 3.13 pm we received an email which identifies >you as the sender. The header of this email states that this email has >originally been sent from a computer with the IP address (that identifies >every computer on the global internet, but see below): >200.84.21.188 >In addition this email carries the identifier 'requenajaime.cantv.net' > >At 4.25 pm the same day a message was posted on the discussion board of >our www page that quotes you as the author. >Our www server logged this message as having been sent from a computer >with the same IP address >200.84.21.188 > >The next day we received another series of messages on our discussion >board, for which again the same IP address was logged: 200.84.21.188 >Among these is one message that was posted at 4.10pm on Sunday 13 October >that quotes as author "Ambassador ToroHary" (same spelling) together with >an email address that looks like (but in fact is not) the email address of >the Venezuelan Ambassador in London. > >So then , we saw ourselves confronted with a series of different messages >from different people that appeared to have all been sent from the same >computer. In addition at least one of these people (the "ambassador") is >certainly not the person they are claiming to be, with several more >writing as "anonymous". > >Please understand that given these data we had no choice but to doubt the >true identity of any of these people writing to us, but we appreciate that >in your case we were wrong. > >I am aware that in cases were people use their home computers to log into >an account they have with an internet provider, they may get issued with a >temporary IP address. For a large provider (which I guess is the case for >CANTV), however, it seems rather unlikely (but not impossible of course) >that several people should get issued with one and the same IP address, >especially in the time frame within which we received the postings. > >We shall be extremely grateful if you could provide us with any more >information that could help to resolve this confusion regarding the origin >of these particular messages and emails. > >Again we hope you accept our apology. > >Yours sincerely, > >Ranty Islam [Mr] > >IHRS          Saludos,                                Jaime Requena, Sc.D.                                   Académico y Profesor Titular 12:34:17 PM    comment []

An Oxford reponse (very poor) > > Dear > > > > My enquiries have produced little that is new. The basic > > facts are that the seminar which he is to address is not a > > University event. The University is unhappy that he is > > coming here and, like this College, many University > > institutions have declined to have anything to do with his > > visit. > > > > The University's briefing to the media is as follows: > > > > BEGINS > > During his visit President Chavez will not be staying as a > > guest of the University of Oxford.  President Chavez will > > be on a private visit, following an invitation from Dr > > William Pepper as Convenor of the International Human > > Rights Seminar, which is unrelated to the University. > > Whilst some rooms in University buildings will be used for > > the conference, it is not an Oxford University event. > > ENDS > > > > All the best - (the master of Saint Anthonys) 12:33:11 PM    comment []

Another Requena Letter Professor Denis Galligan Centre for Socio-Legal Studies Wolfson College Oxford University Dear Sir,          Thank you very much for your e-mail in reply to my letter of protest for the invitation issued to the President of my country to  talk on Humans Rights by the Centre of Socio Legal Studies of Oxford University. In no way I am pretending to infringe the right of speech of Hugo Chávez Frías. Far from that, I am firm believer in responsable free speech.          For years, I have proudly follow the steps of my father -one of the founder's members of our democracy and responsible for ousting the late dictator Perez Jimenez-  crusading my community -science and technology- for a better and freer country, sometimes with letters like this. Thus, I feel free to question the connotation of absolutism that you pretend the free speech concept has. I trust that it never gets put to a test in matters that are crucial to your heart or country, such as being asked to give the floor to a mass murderer, a profligate or an ignorant and, thus, help to spread among students and Dons highly questionable ideas.          The main point that I, among others, have raised concerns the qualifications of President Chavez to dissert about human rights of my country. Is the opinion of many that he is the less qualified Venezuelan to address that issue, either in Caracas or Oxford. Perhaps to others, with a different set of values regarding civil liberties -in places like Havana, Baghdad or Tripoli- he could please the audience with his actions. If your Centre is interested to learn about the issue at hand, I would have thought that you can do much better by looking among other highly qualified Venezuelans, some of them with degrees from your university, that could tackle the problem with much more expertise and immemsely higher moral stature.          Faced with the questionable justifications invoked in your letter and our objections regarding President Chávez extremely poor record upholding peace and justice among human beings, I cannot avoid thinking that his visit to your Centre bears the marks of compliance to high office. Which happens to be an extremely poor consolation in view of the impending intellectual discomfort that Oxonians are about to experience. Sincerely Yours,          Jaime Requena, Sc.D. (Cantab) 12:31:57 PM    comment []

The First Requena Letter Dear sir, As a graduate and former Professor of Cambridge University I take the opportunity to express my disgust to learn that the Centre for Socio- Legal Studies of Oxford University, in its program INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS SEMINAR is receiving the President of my country, Mr. Hugo Chavez Frias, to speak and address the students and fellows of Oxford University. President Chavez record in human rights is less than despicable, starting for its disdain for human life of the soldiers its commanded during his intent to overthrow the government, back in February 4, 1992. More recently, from the presidency of the republic he allowed, if not conducted himself, the slaughter of civilian during a pacific demonstration on April 11, 2002. If these acts against humanity were not enough to in validate him to talk under the umbrella of human rights, Oxford University should know that he is conducting a deliberate and cruel program against our population, having increased by 2 million over the past three years the number of our people living under extreme poverty; isolating our country by siding with terrorist countries such as Cuba, Libia and Irak. But moreover, Mr. Chavez, consistently denigrated of academics and intellectuals, doing every thing under his power to annihilate the Venezuelan academic elite. In fact, we have in Venezuela a rather small number of people devoted to high sciences, technologies and humanities and instead of promoting growth and development Chavez government is making sure that there are ousted out of their jobs and cutting research funding. I, my self, is a vivid example, having been ousted of my post at the "Instituto Internationa de Estudios Avanzados" (IDEA) of Caracas and having been ordered by the tribunal to be restated to my job, as Professor of Biophysics, I am still waiting, 3 years now, that its puppet Supreme Court validates the already given sentence. It happens,  that it directly affects his Minister for Science and Technology, responsible of running IDEA. At the time of writing over one million people inundated the streets of Caracas in protest or the repressive and authoritarian measures taken by Mr. Chavez in the last weeks and asking for his resignation. I know quite well academic life in Great Britain, not only for having obtained from Cambridge University my Ph.D. in 1974 but having being Simón Bolívar Professor of the Centre for Latin American Studies of Cambridge University (1994-1995), Fellow of Churchill College and been awarded a Sc.D. degree in 1997 by Cambridge University. Thus, I would be utterly surprised if my alma mater, Cambridge University, would lend promote the anti-humanitarian cause of  Mr. Chavez. Yours very truly Jaime Requena, Sc.D. Member of the National Academy of Sciences 12:29:23 PM    comment []

Cambridge graduate outraged by Chavez visit: The Requena Files A friend, Cambridge graduate, fellow scientist and long time acquaintance of mine Jaime Requena has been very active in questioning the seminar that the International Human Rights Seminar is holding on Oct. 17 th. with Hugo Chavez as a speaker. I understand according to the Financial Times that they have had the decency of changing the name to Globalization and Poverty. (I imagine Mr. Chavez will talk about how to create poverty, he has a lot of expertise in this field, having created close to 2 million new poor people in his brief stint as President) In any case. Dr. Requena has been kind enought to give me copies of his correspondence  with Oxford University and IHRS which I will compile in a new section called the "Requena Files" on the left. Enjoy!!   (If Oxford University can't even get their IP's straight, you wonder if they even know where Venezuela is, let alone the sterling record of Hugo Chavez in violating Civil Rights, the Constitution and Human Rights) 12:24:10 PM    comment []