The call for the 2020 parliamentary elections in Venezuela is the result of a political agreement between the Chavista forces and a small group of formal opposition, grouped on the platform of the so-called National Dialogue Table. The agreement was designed to give institutional support to the consultative processes of the Bolivian revolution, to remove the disobedience sectors led by Juan Guaidó from the path and contribute, at the same time, to the growth of these emerging formations. r obvious.
The Nicolás Maduro Government has welcomed those organizations that are prepared to recognize Miraflores and participate in its terms of the consultation, and given certain power quotas to certain politicians from these parties, especially in compliance with the new Council directive . National Electoral. Two of the CNE’s five rectors, Leonardo Morales and Luis Fuenmayor, represent this current.
Some of these opposition politicians who, five months ago, asked the Supreme Court of Justice to declare the legislative waiver to appoint the new entity for the elections, regardless of the current National Assembly, led by Guaidó. The Venezuelan Supreme Court ruled in favor a few hours later.
Politicians designed the National Dialogue Table – a space collectively known as “the small table” in Venezuela – along with Cavismo, made some adjustments to the legislative elections model, increasing the number of seats in the Venezuelan unicorn Parliament by more than 100, and leaving the election of 40 seats was assigned to the so-called “list vote”, apart from the population correlation of the electoral circuits. The ruling party had a free hand to buy new election machines, which have no knowledge of their offer and inspection. With these decisions, Chavistas and opponents seek to expand and share power spaces.
The dissenting parties that have decided to attend parliamentarians do not present themselves united with the Dec. 6 elections, a circumstance that makes Chavista a comfortable victory in the process even more practical. These opponents have had a presence in radio and television election advertising and have attended televised debates against Chavista politicians.
Although they converge on the conviction of presenting their candidates to this consultation, no matter how dubious, they have differences in focus and interests. The most popular argument is that expressed by Claudio Fermín, leader of the Solutions movement: the need to combat political polarization as a rule of the current Venezuelan storm; not striving to defeat government, but to focus on the people; not responding to Chavismo with the word opposition.
Of all the parties in the so-called “small table”, Avanzada Progresista, whose leader is Henri Falcón (former governor of Lara and Chavista militia until 2009), the largest and most willing political organization present criticism of Maduro and her management.
Also present are the Movement for Socialism, a party that played a leading role in Venezuelan politics in the 1990s; Soluciones, by Fermín, another politician who was popular 20 years ago; Let’s change, an organization led by Timoteo Zambrano; and the current of the evangelical minister Javier Bertucci, who contested Maduro in contested presidential elections in 2018. These are generally social democratic politicians with an interpretation of the Venezuelan crisis much like the one in Spain on the issue Venezuelan José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero.
Beyond the National Dialogue Table, Primero Venezuela’s formation also attends this election, also on its own. It concerns a handful of parliamentarians who oppose this exercise who have been accused of being bribed by the Government to approach the Executive and take the presidency of the National Assembly from Juan Guaidó.
After those bribes, the Venezuelan Supreme Court, ruled by Chavismo, has issued rulings against the original opposition directives of Primero Justicia and Acción Democrática, Guaidó’s allies, and concealed their internal elections to enforce electoral participation that these were not institutions decided, using leaders who were willing to lend themselves to the move. The circumstance has confused part of the citizenship in a country where official censorship already exists.
The new Unity and Change movement, founded by veteran Christian Socialist leader Eduardo Fernández and led by Mercedes Malavé, as well as other small groups of Christian Democracy, is also attending the consultation.
Although often dismissed for their obstinacy against Guaidó and their complacent attitude towards government, the majority of these leaders have defended without savoring the defensible institutional spaces; not to abandon the voting clause; seek agreements with Chavismo to emerge from the economic ethics; focus managers more on the social crisis than on political change, and seek solutions to the crisis of democracy in the medium and long term.