Carlos Sanchez Berzain Abogado | Estadista | Político | Politólogo
Carlos Sánchez Berzaín
May 30, 2019
(Interamerican Institute for Democracy) The Organization of American States (OAS) General Secretary’s backing to the criminal candidacy of Evo Morales has been aggravated by Luis Almagro’s justification claiming “My position remains the same, reelection is not a human right, but I don’t have any institutional instrument to oppose a judgement, a ruling by the Bolivian Supreme Court, moreover because the American system never said anything about it”. What he said, contravenes the OAS’ system, defiles its principles and regulations to legitimize Evo Morales as a dictator.
On the 22nd of September of 2017, Secretary Almagro wrote on his twitter account: “Evo Morales shall have to respect the popular decision that said NO to a reelection. None of the judges is above the only sovereign mandate; that of the people”.
On 28 October of 2017, Secretary Almagro on behalf of the OAS, requested the “Venetian Commission” to conduct an “Advisement over the reelection” and received their report asserting that “the reelection is not a human right”. When Almagro presented the report, he said: “the report is not a political opinion, it is a document with ample legal validity”.
On 17 May of 2019, in Bolivia and with Evo Morales, Secretary Almagro stated: “to say that Evo Morales today cannot participate, that would be absolutely discriminatory with the other presidents who have participated in electoral processes, based on a judicial ruling acknowledging the guarantees of their human rights”.
The next working day, the 20th of May, at the Interamerican Business & Production Council in Buenos Aires, Almagro stated: “My position remains the same, reelection is not a human right, but I don’t have any institutional instrument to oppose a judgement, a ruling by the Bolivian Supreme Court, moreover because the American system never said anything about it”. The ruling Almagro alludes to is the “Plurinational Constitutional Tribunal” Ruling 0084/2017 that calls for “the preferential application of Article 23 of the American Convention on Human Rights, due to it being the most favorable”.
This brief summary shows that Mr. Luis Almagro has contravened the OAS’ General Secretariat to benefit Evo Morales. Contravene is “to turn something from one position to another which is contrary to the original position” it is “to refuse to admit the truth, reality, value, or worth of something” it is “to disarrange, or change something into another state or position”, it is to change, “to convert or transform something into another thing, frequently opposed to it”, it is to put the regular order upside down.
The contravention is topped off with falsehood when he states in Argentina “but I don’t have any institutional instrument to oppose a judgement, a ruling by the Bolivian Supreme Court, moreover because the American system never said anything about it”. The instruments the OAS’ General Secretary has -amongst others- are; The American Convention on Human Rights, the Interamerican Democratic Charter (IDC), and his competencies as General Secretary that he has successfully used in Venezuela’s case.
Evo Morales’ Tribunal, perverted the course of justice in applying Article 23 of the American Convention on Human Rights by insinuating that it acknowledges as human rights those political rights to be an elector and an elected individual. Almagro must oppose Article 32.2 of this same Convention, the “co-relation amongst duties and rights” that mandates: “The rights of every individual are limited by the rights of the others, by the security of all, and by the just demands of the common good in a democratic society”. Almagro set a precedent when he confronted a ruling against Leopoldo Lopez with an open letter entitled “Almagro says that Lopez’s sentence is the end of democracy in Venezuela. (El Pais newspaper, 26 May 2016 edition).
Secretary Almagro applied the IDC to Venezuela with four reports; the first, on 30 May 2016, initiated the process for the “alteration of the constitutional order”; the second, on 14 March 2017, indicated that in Venezuela not only there was an “alteration to the constitutional order” but there was also “a breakdown of the democratic order” and that this matter needed to be elevated to the OAS’ General Assembly; the third, on 19 July 2017, published after “the General Assembly failed to adopt a resolution on the Venezuelan situation”; and the fourth, on 25 September 2017 confirmed the “the total breakdown of the democratic order” in Venezuela, because the right to Universal Suffrage was removed” and “human rights are no longer respected”.
Bolivia; with the referendum election of 21 February of 2016 (21F) rejecting the reelection, with a constitution that was supplanted and had already been defiled so that Morales could reelect himself in 2014, with the guarantees of Article 32.2 of the American Convention on Human Rights that was in effect, with the absence of all of the essential components of democracy listed in Article 3 of the IDC, with political prisoners, and over 1,200 political exiles, a nation turned into a “narco-state” and with the findings of the Venetian Commission . . . has not given Secretary Almagro any institutional instrument to oppose Evo Morales’ dictatorship!!??
Translated from Spanish by; Edgar L. Terrazas, member of the American Translators’ Association, ATA # 234680.