The Latin American Post
Venezuela’s recent election turmoil highlights the country’s deep-rooted judicial manipulation under the regimes of Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro. This historical analysis explores how the erosion of judicial independence has facilitated authoritarian rule in Venezuela and beyond.
The events surrounding Venezuela’s July 28 elections have brought the country’s longstanding issues with judicial independence back into the spotlight. When global leaders and independent observers cried foul over the election results, President Nicolás Maduro responded with a pledge to “throw myself before justice.” However, such a promise rings hollow in Venezuela, where the Supreme Court has been reduced to a mere extension of presidential power.
To understand how Venezuela reached this point, one must look back to the late 1990s when Hugo Chávez first came to power. Chávez’s rise marked the beginning of a systematic dismantling of Venezuela’s democratic institutions, with the judiciary being a primary target. In 1999, shortly after taking office, Chávez convened a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution. The revised constitution initially appeared to strengthen democratic checks and balances, including guarantees for an independent judiciary and an autonomous Supreme Court.
However, this commitment to judicial independence was short-lived. In 2004, Chávez’s congressional majority passed legislation to expand the Supreme Court from 20 to 32 members, a move that allowed him to stack the court with loyalists. This “court packing” effectively neutralized the judiciary as an independent branch of government and set the stage for the authoritarian rule that would follow. Chávez’s actions laid the groundwork for the manipulation of Venezuela’s judiciary, a tactic that has been employed by his successor, Nicolás Maduro, to maintain control over the country.
Read the full article
