Political Destabilization in Venezuela and the Western Media’s Double Standard
Print This
By Salim Lamrani. Opera Mundi
GlobalResearch.ca
Tuesday, Jun 3, 2014
While the
opposition is responsible for the deadly violence which has plagued the
country since February 2014, Western media continue to accuse the
democratically elected government of Nicolás Maduro.
Since 1998, the Venezuelan opposition has consistently rejected the
results of the country’s democratic elections. There is a single
exception: it recognized the legitimacy of its own victory in the
constitutional referendum of December 2, 2007, something it won by less
than a one percent margin. The right has been strongly opposed to the
legitimately elected governments of Hugo Chávez, in office from 1999 to
2013, and that of Nicolás Maduro, in office since April, 2013. All means
have been used in attempts to overthrow them: coups, political
assassinations, sabotage of oil installations, economic warfare (since
1999), calls for revolt and media smear campaigns.
Since February 2014, Venezuela has been hit by deadly violence,
violence that has killed more than 40 people, including at least five
policemen and a government prosecutor. More than 600 people have been
injured, including 150 police officers. Property damage exceeds 10
billion dollars and includes buses burned, subway stations vandalized, a
university – UNEFA – completely destroyed by fire, dozens of tons of
food destined for government-run supermarkets burned to cinders, public
buildings and government offices looted, electrical installations
sabotaged, medical centers devastated, electoral institutions destroyed,
etc.
Faced with destabilization attempts that are clearly intended to
provoke a breach in the constitutional order, the Venezuelan authorities
mounted a vigorous response and arrested several opposition leaders who
had launched appeals for anti-government uprisings or promoted acts of
vandalism, as well as arresting nearly a thousand people who had been
involved in the violence. Like any state governed by the rule of law,
and in strict observance of constitutional guarantees, the Venezuelan
justice system indicted the accused and applied sanctions provided for
such acts by the penal code.
Western media, which sides with the undemocratic and coup-prone
opposition, have been content simply to denounce human rights
violations. At the same time, they fail to report the murders committed
by the protesters, the seizures of weapons and explosives carried out by
police within groups that present themselves as peace-loving and the
destruction of public and private properties.
Western media outrage varies with the circumstances and is not
applied universally. Indeed, the press maintains a surprising silence
when other countries impose draconian measures for considerably less
severe disorders than those that have occurred in Venezuela.
The case of France is revealing. On October 27, 2005, following the
accidental death of two teenagers pursued by the police, urban riots
broke out in certain Paris suburbs and other major cities around the
country. The extent of the violence – which did not result in a single
death – was less than what has occurred in Venezuela in recent weeks.
However, on November 8, 2005, President Jacques Chirac declared a
state of emergency throughout the country and imposed a curfew, both of
which remained in force for several months. These were actions permitted
under Decree 2005-1386, an April 3, 1955 law that had been adopted
during the war in Algeria, legislation that had not been used since
1961. The law allows for the suspension of constitutional guarantees and
seriously undermines civil liberties because it “prohibit(s) the
movement of people”, “establish(es) protected areas where the security
and length of stay of individuals can be regulated” and, “in territorial
circumscriptions or specific regions, allows for house arrest of
individuals residing in an area established by the decree”.
Similarly, “the Minister of the Interior, for the entire territory
in which a state of emergency has been declared, in conjunction with the
prefect of the Department, may order the temporary closure of theatres,
pubs and bars, indeed of meeting places of any kind as determined by
the decree provided for in Article 2.” These authorities are also
empowered to “ban meetings that are deemed likely to cause or encourage
disorder.”
The law of April 3, 1955 confers to the “administrative authorities
referred to in Article 8 the power to order house searches by day or by
night” and empowers “the same authorities to take all necessary
measures to ensure control of the press and publications of any kind as
well as radio broadcasts, film screenings and theatre performances.”
This legislation also empowers military justice to replace the
civil justice system. Thus, authorities “may authorize military courts
to judge crimes and related offences that otherwise would have been
responsibility of the Assize Court of the Department,” thereby
undermining the jurisdiction of national common law.
To justify such measures, measures that contravene the European
Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Paris had relied upon Article 15 of
the ECHR, which authorizes, “in time of war or public emergency
threatening the life of the nation”, the suspension of obligations to
which France had subscribed.
At no time has Venezuela – struck by far more serious violence than
what occurred in France in 2005 – declared a state of emergency,
suspended constitutional guarantees, infringed civil liberties or
imposed military justice at the expense of civil justice.
A more recent example is equally illustrative. Following the riots
of August 14, 2012 in the city of Amiens, which caused significant
property damage (a school and several public buildings were burned) and
injured 17 policemen, the French justice system severely punished the
perpetrators of these crimes. Six people were sentenced to prison terms
ranging from one to five years in prison without the possibility of
parole. The juvenile court of Amiens sentenced five teenagers, aged 14
to 17, to prison terms ranging up to 30 months.
It would be easy to continue citing examples. When the New York
police arbitrarily detained over 700 peaceful demonstrators who had been
brutalized by the police, the Western media carefully avoided accusing
the Obama administration of violating human rights.
Similarly, when the Brazilian police violently cracked down on
peaceful protesters in Sao Paulo, arresting some 262 people in a single
day as well as assaulting several journalists, the media did not
question the democratic legitimacy of President Dilma Rousseff.
Western media are incapable of being impartial when it comes to
interpreting complex Venezuelan reality. The charter of journalistic
ethics is systematically flouted by a press that refuses to fulfill its
duty to provide truthful information and chooses instead to defend a
certain political agenda. This agenda flies in the face of the basic
principles of democracy and goes against the will, expressed repeatedly
at the polls, of the Venezuelan people.
Original source:
http://operamundi.uol.com.br/conteudo/babel/35356/venezuela+y+el+doble+rasero+de+los+medios+informativos+occidentales.shtml
Translated from the French by Larry R. Oberg.
Source URL
|
|
Print This
|