The Chavista Assembly abolished the legislative conventions of the elected parliament in 2015
Venezuela’s National Assembly, where Chavestas holds 92% of its seats, agreed on Tuesday to cancel all legislative agreements passed by the assembly between January 6, 2016 and January 4 this year, the opposition period. The majority of.
“This National Assembly is self-correcting and annuls previous National Assembly resolutions that led to the theft of (state) companies like Citgo and Monómeros”The president of the AN that responds to the interests of the regime, Jorge Rodriguez, reassured the parliament session.
Rodriguez denounced that the countries that supported these agreements “did so because they wanted to steal the money and wealth that Venezuela has on its territory.”
“They know that this has nothing to do with the law and nothing to do with the tasks and functions of Parliament.”, handle.
Likewise, Timoteo Zambrano, who was part of the opposition coalition that gained a majority in the last period, supported the agreement proposed by Chaveza and added that these actions must be canceled or Venezuela will continue “without giving a solution to this barbarism of these two legislative years.”
The ratified bill notes that during the previous parliamentary period the agreements were approved “with the intentional intent to violate the constitutional and legal order, or specifically, to exercise competencies commensurate with other public authorities.”
In addition, they noted in the document that these agreements are “non-existent or ineffective” and therefore “lack of formal and material validity, and cannot produce the legal effects they intended in their declaration.”
Chavista deputies agreed to disregard any act, agreement, contract or procedure created in international fora, drawn from these agreements ratified by the majority of the opposition.
They also asked the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which is also controlled by Nicolás Maduro’s regime and all other organs of the dictatorship’s justice system, to investigate and determine civil, criminal and administrative responsibilities.
In December 2015, when the opposition won a majority of AN seats, the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) challenged the Amazonas state’s results for alleged irregularities recorded in that district during the voting.
However, the three opponents who won that state went to the House and were sworn in by the opposition majority that was inaugurated in January 2016, prompting the Supreme Court to declare contempt of the legislature and, thus, invalidate all their holdings. Proceedings until the appeal was withdrawn.
Although parliamentarians later decided to withdraw from the AN, the Supreme Court insisted on contempt and did not resolve the challenge to Amazonas’ findings either.
(With information from EFE)