direct and deliberative democracy effects: venezuelan case · 2014-05-07 · the election and began...

The 7th ECPR General Conference Sciences Po Bordeaux, Domaine Universitaire.

Direct and Deliberative Democracy Effects:

Venezuelan Case

Pedro Capra Vieira

Paper to be presented at the 7th ECPR General Conference

August 2013

1

Introduction:

This paper will analyze the introduction of mechanisms of direct democracy in

Venezuela through the New Constitution, convened and approved via referendum in

1999. The introduction and use of these new mechanisms will be evaluated from the

perspective of complementarity to the representative system, therefore, vote, political

parties and the national congress.

To establish this analysis, data will be used on democracy produced by

Latinbarometro on Venezuela from 1995 to 2010. Thus, we will seek to identify how

society saw the changes brought by the new Constitution and how participatory

mechanisms contained in it may have changed the perception of democracy in

Venezuela.

Venezuela is a country in Latin American with an old democratic tradition that

has been maintained over the last 55 years under a regime where freedom prevails, the

right to vote and the respect for institutions are assured. In the years before the New

Constitution, Venezuela was organized politically through the Punto Fijo Pact, which

established a two-party system of competition for power, where AD (Accion

Democratica) and COPEI (Organización Policy Committee Electoral Independiente)

alternated in power.

Being an oil producing country and a member of OPEC (Organization of

Petroleum Exporting Countries), the Venezuelan economy has strong dependence on

oil, getting also exposed to international market variations. After the crisis of 1980,

Venezuela adopted the political/economical model neoliberal, opting to perform

various privatizations in order to reduce the state's role in the economy.

Faced by the adjustment policies imposed by international organizations, the

country explodes in a violent movement against the political administration. This

movement culminated in the so-called Caracazo, a bloody clash between government

forces and the population of the city of Caracas.

At this time, the gains strength the Fifth Republic Movement (MVR), one of

whose leaders is then lieutenant colonel Hugo Chávez. Facing the political instability

of the early 1990s, his group tries a coup against President Carlos Andrés Pérez in

1992. Frustrated in the attempted military coup, this same group, under the leadership

of Chavez, decided to come to power through elections, and in 1998, Hugo Chávez

won the presidential election in Venezuela and was named president.

2

Once victorious, decides to put in practice what was believed to be the way to

expand democracy in Venezuela, turn it into a participatory democracy.

This paper will examine whether the transformations experienced in

Venezuela in the last 20 years changed the country's democracy, establishing a link

between the representative system and direct popular participation, and, especially,

awareness of civil society about their powers and duties within a system democratic.

1) Venezuela 55 years of democracy

Venezuela has one of the oldest democracies in the whole South America,

along with Costa Rica and Colombia. The Venezuelan democracy begins in January

1958 with the fall of the dictatorial regime that ruled the country between 1948-1958.

The coup of 24 November 1948 was a military and political uprising against

the democratically elected Venezuelan president Rómulo Gallegos, in its place was

installed a military junta headed by Carlos Delgado Chalbaud, and also integrated by

Lt. Col. Marcos Pérez Jiménez. In 1950, after the assassination of Chalbaud the

military junta appointed as new president, Germán Suárez Flamerich. With fresh

elections in 1952, Marcos Pérez Jiménez, on charges of fraud, was declared winner of

the election and began the period with his dictatorial government that would end in

1958 through new coup perpetrated by the Venezuelan military.

With the end of the regime of Marcos Pérez Jiménez begins the democratic

process in Venezuela culminating in the Constitutional Charter of 1961. This process

began to be sewn into the treaty Puntofijo, whose goal was to reintegrate the

marginalized political groups during the dictatorial period to the representative

democratic system that germinated. Therefore sought to bring political scene

institutional political parties. However, the Communist Party of Venezuela, a major

actor in the fight against the military dictatorship was excluded from the pact

Puntofijo, having been pursued in the following period due to his stay in illegality.

During the period following the return to democracy, prevailed, although,

unofficially, the puntofijismo system. This system was based on a kind of partisanship

where Accion Democratica (AD) and COPEI (Organización Policy Committee

Electoral Independiente) competed electorally and ruled together.

The puntofijismo in Venezuela lasted until the end of the government of

Rafael Caldera in 1999, when, after the victory of Hugo Chavez to the presidency of

the republic, and the election of a new Congress, the power of these two parties were

3

reduced, allowing new forces to engage and act in institutional politics. This election

allowed the Hugo Chavez group, 'Movimiento V Republica' to become the second

largest party in both Venezuelan legislative houses.

However, the rise to power of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela demonstrates that

democracy in Venezuela is, although long-lived, quite tumultuous. Before being

elected president, ventured a coup, in 1992, against the government of Carlos Andrés

Pérez (1989-1993). Peréz had been weakened since 1989 when the country was taken

over by a wave of protests against the economic measures that were required by

international organizations as a way of organizing the state accounts and recover the

valuation of the national currency, badly weakened by a decade of inflation. The early

1980s in Venezuela represent a shift in the economic life of the country, as well as

many of the countries of South America.

These demonstrations became violent and official figures confirm the death of

300 people, it is speculated, however, that 2000 people died in clashes with

government forces and infighting between protesters between 27 and 28 February

1989, this episode became known as the Caracazo.

The fall in oil prices earlier in the decade is one factor that helps to understand

the Venezuelan economy during that period. Oil prices hit high after two bouts of

supply triggered by conflicts between countries of the Persian Gulf region, the main

oil producer. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait and Venezuela are founding members

of OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries). Therefore, in a context

where during the 1970s and early 80s Venezuela was the only country member in

OPEC not to be an area of armed conflict allowed the oil to be responsible for great

part of the national GDP. This becomes more clear, by the oil nationalization and the

creation of PDVSA (Petróleos de Venezuela SA) in 1976.

Chavez's election in 1998 to the presidency is linked to events over the

decades 1980-90. The Caracazo was a spontaneous social mobilization and had as

main focus, the critique to neoliberal policies carried out in recent decades that

resulted in unfavorable economic situation, with high inflation and unemployment.

In this scenario, there is a military coup attempt against the government of

Carlos Pérez Andréz in 1992. This frustrated attempt had as a leader the Lt. Col. Of

the Venezuelan Army, Hugo Chavez Frias. Convicted of this uprising, Chavez was

arrested. However, he and the movement v Republic created a new political platform

4

within Venezuela, his proposals ran counter to popular expectations of better

economic conditions and against neoliberal policies.

Moreover, there were discussions already on ways to encourage and ensure

popular participation in political institutions of the country. Thus, the political

platform that the group of parties supporters of Chavez application, called the

Patriotic Pole, had advocated as the basis of his election platform to convene a

Constituent Assembly. The purpose of this proposal was to create mechanisms that

guarantee democracy popular.

Table 1. Elected by parties to the national congress in 1998

Partidos Eleitos Senado Eleitos Câmara de Deputados

Acción Democratica 19 62

Movimiento V Republica (MRV) 12 42

Proyecto Venezuela 4 20

COPEI 7 28

Movimiento Al Socialismo (MAS) 5 17

La Causa Radical (LCR) 1 6

Convergencia 2 4

Patria Para Todos (PPT) 1 7

Apertura 1 3

Otros Partidos 2 14

Total 54 207 Source: www.cne.gov.ve

However, the Almao’s (2005) work points, even if noted the clear democratic

vocation of Venezuela since 1983, opinion polls show that grew in Venezuela

between 1995 and 2000 the attraction for a strong authoritative leader. Their research

also shows that there was a decline in sympathy for having a military government.

These two findings help to think about the purpose of this study, as they bring the

5

question of consistency between the proposed democratization of Venezuelan society

through inclusive economic policies and the establishment of participatory

mechanisms that ensure the power company and the growth of this cult of the strong

leader and authoritarian, according to research Almao can go over the national

assembly when deemed necessary.

Given this, what role did the introduction of mechanisms of direct democracy

had in the democratic imaginary of Venezuelan society? Participation in several

popular queries created a new way of thinking about public life in Venezuelan society

or served only to legitimize decisions made by a strong authoritative leader?

Based on data obtained from Latinobarometro, results of surveys conducted

annually between 1995 and 2010 in Venezuela, this text will attempt to evaluate this

information in order to answer these questions and seek to understand the impact that

the introduction of these mechanisms had on the democracy perception by

Venezuelan society.

2) The introduction of direct democracy mechanisms.

With the victory of Hugo Chávez in the 1998 elections, the new president and

his supporters decided to convene the national assembly constituency in order to

respond to the participatory demands of the society, as well as to structure a new

political organization that bury the two-party system that was in force under the

agreement of puntofijismo, which was unable to produce a response to the concerns

society. Thus, the Polo Patriotic united around the necessary support for the

convening of the meeting.

Thus, the elected resident had force and supported by Article 181 of the 1961

Constitution, called the referendum that would determine whether or not the

constitution of the assembly. This argument served to deconstruct the criticism of the

opposition, led by AD and COPEI. However, the Supreme Court ruled the

constitutional referendum and determined the date of February 15, 1999 for

completion of order consultation. However, still being not confident of having

majority support in Congress, newly sworn President decided to call the referendum

by presidential decree (decree No. 3 of February 2, 1999). Therefore, by having the

president decided on the referendum, this is characterized as a from above.

The call from above is when the start of a popular consultation is based on the

executive or the legislature, in this case, traditional institutions of representative

6

system decide on whether or not to call a referendum on a particular theme. Instead,

there is the call from below, where the civil society has the means to initiate and sign

a petition for an initiative.

As we can see in Table 2, in Venezuela, only one call was the type from

below. 8 of referendums in the country between 1990 and 2013, seven were initiated

or government or constitutional obligation. Only the recall of mandate was initiated

based on collecting signatures peticionavam by referendum.

Table 2.

Source: http://www.c2d.ch/

By observing this data, arise the question that the mechanisms of direct

democracy introduced in Venezuela at the end of the 1990s may have been used as a

way to support the government of the populist President Hugo Chávez, where, in an

attempt to establish a direct link between your government and the population, the

leading figure overlaps the classic structure of the representative system, congress and

political parties.

However, other data must be evaluated to determine the veracity of this

hypothesis. Since, despite calls for popular queries from above, there was the

summoning of the recall referendum by the collection of signatures required for

approval of the National Electoral Council. Also, it was maintained the representative

system, with periodic elections, party competition, government coalitions, and

freedom of trade union organization. There is no undemocratic decision by the

government, which dismisses the possibility to classify it as authoritative.

3) Popular perception about democracy

Data collected by Latinobarometro serve to understand how the population

perceived the 1999 Constitution and its amendments.

7

As can be seen in Table 3, support for democracy as the best form of

government grows from 2002, coming in 2010, 20% more support than found in

1995, the starting year of the survey.

Table 3.

Apoyo a la democracia

Total

La democracia es preferible a cualquier

otra forma de gobierno

En algunas circunstancias,

un gobierno autoritario puede ser preferible

A la gente como uno, nos da lo mismo un régimen

democrático

Venezuela 17506 (100%) 72,6 % 15,8 % 11,6 %

1995 1129 (100%) 63,5 % 22,6 % 13,9 %

1996 1418 (100%) 65,8 % 20,2 % 14,0 %

1997 1158 (100%) 66,4 % 18,0 % 15,5 %

1998 1178 (100%) 61,5 % 25,0 % 13,5 %

2000 1143 (100%) 64,3 % 25,1 % 10,6 %

2001 1134 (100%) 60,1 % 21,6 % 18,3 %

2002 1137 (100%) 77,6 % 13,0 % 9,4 %

2003 1155 (100%) 70,3 % 16,5 % 13,2 %

2004 1161 (100%) 76,6 % 11,3 % 12,1 %

2005 1138 (100%) 79,9 % 11,3 % 8,8 %

2006 1105 (100%) 75,9 % 12,4 % 11,8 %

2007 1122 (100%) 71,3 % 14,9 % 13,8 %

2008 1173 (100%) 83,5 % 9,5 % 7,0 %

2009 1187 (100%) 86,3 % 6,1 % 7,6 %

2010 1168 (100%) 86,5 % 8,8 % 4,7 %

Total 17506 (100%) 72,6 % 15,8 % 11,6 %

Source: Latinobarometro. http://www.latinobarometro.org/

Similarly, the acceptance of an authoritarian regime in some cases fell almost

16% in the same period, leaving frightening 25% in 1998 to 8.8% in 2010.

It is difficult to credit this change directly the new constitution and even more

complicated, to connect it with the introduction of direct democracy mechanisms

contained therein. However, we can see that there is indeed a positive shift in the

8

perception of democracy by the society. However, support for this scheme is

connected to its approach to the population since the Venezuelan democracy is old, if

we consider the values of Latin America, but always with his leadership

characteristics, under the system puntofijismo under political economic elites.

Moreover, we find in Table 4, data showing that there were in the same period

a significant increase in satisfaction with democracy. Again, a 15% increase between

1998 and 2010. From the enactment of the Venezuelan new constitution and the

beginning of the use of mechanisms of direct democracy, satisfaction with democracy

increased.

Table 4.

Satisfacción con la democracia

Suma Muy satisfecho

Más bien satisfecho

No muy satisfecho

Nada satisfecho

Venezuela 17868 (100%) 19,6 % 25,9 % 36,9 % 17,6 %

1995 1157 (100%) 11,8 % 25,7 % 39,8 % 22,7 % 1996 1475 (100%) 7,9 % 22,6 % 42,1 % 27,4 % 1997 1180 (100%) 12,6 % 23,8 % 42,6 % 20,9 % 1998 1192 (100%) 13,2 % 22,5 % 39,5 % 24,8 % 2000 1176 (100%) 28,1 % 27,6 % 36,8 % 7,5 % 2001 1152 (100%) 16,7 % 25,8 % 41,8 % 15,7 % 2002 1155 (100%) 21,1 % 21,3 % 43,5 % 14,1 % 2003 1175 (100%) 18,5 % 19,5 % 34,3 % 27,6 % 2004 1159 (100%) 19,6 % 24,1 % 36,3 % 20,0 % 2005 1163 (100%) 28,0 % 29,8 % 30,6 % 11,6 % 2006 1153 (100%) 32,8 % 26,5 % 30,5 % 10,1 % 2007 1182 (100%) 29,3 % 30,3 % 29,9 % 10,6 % 2008 1190 (100%) 23,9 % 25,7 % 34,7 % 15,7 % 2009 1193 (100%) 17,7 % 30,1 % 37,3 % 14,9 % 2010 1166 (100%) 15,6 % 34,8 % 32,5 % 17,0 %

17868 (100%) 19,6 % 25,9 % 36,9 % 17,6 %


It is interesting to think of explanations for this since it is a country of

consolidated democracy. It is possible to conclude that democracy has improved with

the new constitution?

Dissatisfaction with democracy fell 10% between the years 1998 and 2010,

going from 65% to 49.5%. These figures show, with no room for doubt, that the

society is more satisfied with the model of democracy stimulated by the 1999

constitution.

Now, one could speculate that the increased support and satisfaction with

democracy grew in this period due to the popular identification with strong

9

leadership. However, when we look at Table 5, we see that the confidence in the

national congress also grew during this period, leaving 35% in 2000 to 51% in 2010.

This increase shows that the representative system gained new dimension in society.

Its role to play and compete within the Congress and so reflect concerns of the

population came to be better assessed.

Table 5.

Confianza en Congreso

Suma Mucha confianza

Algo de confianza

Poca confianza

Ninguna confianza

Venezuela 17642 (100%) 13,0 % 23,9 % 27,7 % 35,4 %

1995 1170 (100%) 9,1 % 13,2 % 32,4 % 45,3 % 1996 1458 (100%) 5,5 % 13,9 % 31,5 % 49,1 % 1997 1175 (100%) 11,3 % 18,9 % 31,8 % 38,0 % 1998 1175 (100%) 7,9 % 12,3 % 30,0 % 49,8 % 2000 1118 (100%) 13,2 % 21,8 % 22,3 % 42,7 % 2001 1163 (100%) 14,7 % 24,0 % 32,9 % 28,4 % 2002 1160 (100%) 13,6 % 22,5 % 31,1 % 32,8 % 2003 1171 (100%) 4,4 % 14,5 % 25,2 % 55,9 % 2004 1120 (100%) 11,9 % 20,9 % 29,7 % 37,5 % 2005 1137 (100%) 17,8 % 34,4 % 26,2 % 21,5 % 2006 1123 (100%) 24,4 % 34,3 % 19,6 % 21,7 % 2007 1161 (100%) 24,5 % 33,1 % 21,3 % 21,1 % 2008 1163 (100%) 11,0 % 31,7 % 29,1 % 28,2 % 2009 1179 (100%) 11,2 % 32,3 % 27,5 % 29,0 % 2010 1168 (100%) 16,7 % 33,9 % 23,8 % 25,6 %

Suma 17642 (100%) 13,0 % 23,9 % 27,7 % 35,4 %


The period before the new constitution was of great distrust with the National

Congress reaching 81% in 1996. Clearly, if 81% of the population does not trust in

their representatives, whose function is to represent the interests of society, something

was out of tune. That number dropped to 49% in 2010, still high, but considerably

less remote from the interests and desires than 15 years before.

However, with respect to political parties, Table 6 presents data that indicate

substantial improvements. Rising from 15% confidence in 1998 to 44% in 2010. This

must be understood from the perspective of necessities of rooting in society that the

parties were bound to face after the new 1999 constitution, working with popular

assemblies in neighborhoods and small towns, listening to the demands presented by

the company, in a system where there is greater participation in the creation demands

by the population. In this same period, little or no trust in political parties fell from

81.5% in 1998 to 56% in 2010.

10

Table 6.

Confianza en los Partidos Políticos


Algo de confianza

Poca confianza

Ninguna confianza

Venezuela 17891 (100%) 7,4 % 18,7 % 30,2 % 43,7 %

1995 1176 (100%) 6,1 % 9,9 % 28,5 % 55,4 % 1996 1471 (100%) 3,0 % 8,6 % 23,6 % 64,9 % 1997 1177 (100%) 7,4 % 13,8 % 33,0 % 45,8 % 1998 1193 (100%) 5,1 % 10,4 % 27,4 % 57,1 % 2000 1156 (100%) 9,2 % 15,0 % 25,1 % 50,8 % 2001 1179 (100%) 10,7 % 20,1 % 29,7 % 39,5 % 2002 1166 (100%) 7,4 % 12,3 % 26,9 % 53,4 % 2003 1171 (100%) 2,7 % 11,5 % 25,2 % 60,6 % 2004 1160 (100%) 5,6 % 16,9 % 26,5 % 50,9 % 2005 1178 (100%) 8,5 % 23,7 % 34,3 % 33,5 % 2006 1159 (100%) 12,3 % 29,1 % 34,1 % 24,4 % 2007 1179 (100%) 9,9 % 26,1 % 33,9 % 30,0 % 2008 1178 (100%) 9,1 % 23,3 % 36,8 % 30,8 % 2009 1179 (100%) 8,4 % 25,2 % 37,2 % 29,3 % 2010 1169 (100%) 6,5 % 37,3 % 33,0 % 23,1 %

Suma 17891 (100%) 7,4 % 18,7 % 30,2 % 43,7 %


Therefore, this increased trust towards political parties should be related to the

capacity of the population in propose guidelines through deliberative forums

introduced in society, where the ability to act independently of the wishes of the

population is more restricted due to the setting of the agenda by the society and the

greater collection capacity obtained through the approximation between politicians

and civil society in deliberative forums.

Another pillar of the representative democratic system, the judiciary also notes

important changes under the look of the population, having gained more trust with

society. Table 7 shows this improvement, showing a growth of almost 10% between

1998 and 2010.

Table 7.

Confianza en el Poder Judicial


Algo de confianza

Poca confianza

Ninguna confianza

Venezuela 17821 (100%) 12,9 % 24,6 % 32,8 % 29,7 %

1995 1173 (100%) 13,0 % 16,5 % 32,0 % 38,6 % 1996 1471 (100%) 9,8 % 17,9 % 34,1 % 38,1 % 1997 1181 (100%) 18,4 % 19,3 % 39,6 % 22,7 % 1998 1170 (100%) 12,9 % 17,1 % 36,2 % 33,8 % 2000 1170 (100%) 22,1 % 25,8 % 30,7 % 21,5 % 2001 1181 (100%) 16,8 % 26,4 % 32,7 % 24,1 %

11

2002 1182 (100%) 11,4 % 19,7 % 37,5 % 31,4 % 2003 1174 (100%) 4,8 % 14,8 % 29,1 % 51,3 % 2004 1144 (100%) 9,6 % 25,7 % 32,3 % 32,5 % 2005 1158 (100%) 13,7 % 29,8 % 31,8 % 24,8 % 2006 1149 (100%) 23,0 % 37,6 % 24,0 % 15,5 % 2007 1171 (100%) 13,3 % 33,1 % 32,9 % 20,7 % 2008 1178 (100%) 9,8 % 28,5 % 32,2 % 29,5 % 2009 1167 (100%) 8,0 % 27,1 % 33,6 % 31,4 % 2010 1151 (100%) 7,7 % 31,7 % 32,8 % 27,8 %

Suma 17821 (100%) 12,9 % 24,6 % 32,8 % 29,7 %


It can also be noticed that there was a significant increase in the perception

under the necessity of voting to achieve the objectives within the company, the vote

grows in importance as the population realizes that his vote brings the expected

benefits, and ensure that elected representatives have the constant concern to

understand the needs of their constituents and work to approve projects that are of

interest and support of the population. Table 8 shows how the growing importance of

voting in the perception of the population, leaving 46% in 1996 to 86% in 2010, a

growth of 40%.

Table 8.

La importancia de votar

Suma

Como uno vote puede

hacer cambiar las cosas en el

futuro

No importa como uno

vote no mejorará las cosas en el

futuro

Venezuela 9158 (100%) 65,9 % 34,1 % 1995 1082 (100%) 52,5 % 47,5 %

1996 1335 (100%) 55,0 % 45,0 % 1997 1108 (100%) 46,5 % 53,5 % 1998 1134 (100%) 71,9 % 28,1 % 2003 1131 (100%) 67,4 % 32,6 % 2004 1104 (100%) 73,4 % 26,6 % 2005 1092 (100%) 74,2 % 25,8 % 2009 1172 (100%) 86,6 % 13,4 %

Suma 9158 (100%) 65,9 % 34,1 % Source: Latinobarometro. http://www.latinobarometro.org/

Finally, political parties, important for the representative system also gain

strength with the company after the 1999 constitution. In the period before the

convocation of the Constituent Assembly and the introduction of mechanisms of

direct democracy the perception that political parties were important to democracy

12

represented 54% of the population, in 2010 85% say that without political parties

there can be no democracy. Table 9.

No puede haber democracia sin partidos políticos

Suma Sin partidos políticos no puede haber democracia

La democracia puede funcionar

sin partidos políticos

Venezuela 11023 (100%) 65,8 % 34,2 % 1995 1111 (100%) 59,8 % 40,2 %

1997 1110 (100%) 54,1 % 45,9 % 2000 1045 (100%) 44,2 % 55,8 % 2001 1083 (100%) 49,2 % 50,8 % 2002 1093 (100%) 60,9 % 39,1 % 2005 1075 (100%) 73,5 % 26,5 % 2006 1095 (100%) 64,1 % 35,9 % 2008 1155 (100%) 79,0 % 21,0 % 2009 1133 (100%) 85,7 % 14,3 % 2010 1123 (100%) 85,4 % 14,6 %


Conclusions:

The aim of this work is to present data on the perception of democracy by the

Venezuelan population starting in the period before the introduction of mechanisms of

direct democracy through the National Constitution of 1999 and comparing with the

years after until 2010.

The data show that democracy was consolidated in Venezuela and the

population moved in the perception of their rights and powers in a democratic

representative system. The respect towards institutions, the regularity of elections,

freedom of choice and the right to vote, were already rights of Venezuelan citizens in

their ancient democracy (ancient when we take into account the South American

standards). However, the introduction of new participatory mechanisms and their

constant use has made the population more interested in politics, in participate more

and believe that their interests would be carried out by the representatives.

Table 10 shows exactly that the growth of the belief that its political ideas can

come to power, and thus the political approaches of the population even more.

Democracy gets closer to the interests of society.

Table 10.

Oportunidad de sus ideas políticas de llegar al

poder

13

Suma Tiene las mismas oportunidades

No tiene las mismas

oportunidades

Venezuela 5699 (100%) 64,7 % 35,3 % 1996 1099 (100%) 47,8 % 52,2 %

1997 967 (100%) 56,3 % 43,7 % 1998 1069 (100%) 73,9 % 26,1 % 2002 967 (100%) 69,4 % 30,6 % 2009 1021 (100%) 65,9 % 34,1 % 2010 576 (100%) 83,9 % 16,1 %


And this happens without weaken the representative institutions, parties,

elections; vote and judiciary power also became better evaluated after the constitution

of 1999 and the beginning of the constant use of mechanisms of direct democracy.

So in this case, representative democracy and direct democracy mechanisms,

worked to accentuate the perception of society about democracy by approaching the

population to the decision-making in political life.

From this approach, democracy has become more popular and closer to the

concerns of civil society and the space between the decisions taken by representatives

of the population and interest decreases, providing a new political arrangement where

elections and regularly clean votes do not represent all forms of popular participation,

deliberative assemblies where neighborhoods and popular consultations gain

importance and reaffirm the preponderance of people in democratic decisions.

References:

Almao, Valia Pereira. A Consistência Democrática Na Venezuela Em Tempos De

Mudança Política. Opinião Pública, Campinas, Vol. Xi, Nº 1, Março, 2005

Altman, David. Democracia Directa En El Continente Americano:

¿Autolegitimación Gubernamental O Censura Ciudadana? In: Politica Y Gobierno.

Vol Xii, Num. 2. 2005.

Barros, Pedro Silva. Chávez e Petróleo: Uma Análise da Nova Política Econômica

Venezuelana. Cadernos Prolam/Usp Ano 5 -‐ Vol. 2. 2006.

14

Breur, Anita. The Use Of Government-‐Initiated Referendums In Latin America.

Towards A Theory Of Referendum Causes. Revista De Ciencia Política / Volumen

29/ Nº 1 / 2009.

Carbonell, M. Carpizo, J. Zovatto, D. Tendencias Del Constitucionalismo En

Iberoamérica. Instituto Internacional Para La Democracia Y La Asistencia

Electoral. 2009.

Kornblith, Miriam. The Referendum In Venezuela. Elections Versus Democracy.

Journal Of Democracy Volume 16, Number 1 January 2005.

Ley De Los Consejos Comunales / Colección Textos Legislativos Abril, 2006.

Lissidini, Alicia. La Democracia Directa En Venezuela: ¿Democracia Participativa

O Democracia Plebiscitaria? C2d Working Papers. Number 25. 2008.

Pitkin, Hanna. Representation And Democracy: An Uneasy Alliance. Scandinavian

Political Studies, Jaarg.. 27, Nr. 3, 2004.

The Carter Center. Observing The Venezuela Presidential Recall Referendum

Villa, Rafael Duarte. Venezuela: Mudanças Políticas Na Era Chávez, Rev. Estudos

Avançados 19 (55), 2005.

Sites:

www.c2d.ch

http://www.cne.gov.ve/

http://www.idea.int/

http://www.latinobarometro.org/

http://www.minci.gob.ve/

direct and deliberative democracy effects: venezuelan case · 2014-05-07 · the election and began...

Documents