President Nicolás Maduro closed the door and the Supreme Court locked it. The Constitutional Chamber of the TSJ shielded the decrees signed by the Head of State to declare a state of emergency in the municipalities along the border and suspend the free passage to the Republic of Colombia.
The special measure issued by the Executive Branch in the second half of 2015 affected the states of Táchira, Zulia, Apure and Amazonas. In all cases, the judges supported the initiative by legally validating the President’s thesis, who resorted to this measure on the grounds that it would combat “paramilitary groups, drug trafficking and smuggling” that threatened the country’s stability.
The border was effectively closed a few weeks before the parliamentary elections on December 6, 2015, which the opposition ended up winning by more than 2 million votes, obtaining thus a qualified two-third majority of the National Assembly.
After learning of Maduro’s decision, the opposition Democratic Unity Board (MUD) released a statement rejecting it, and warned that it could be used as an excuse to disrupt the electoral process. “This unusual and disproportionate state of emergency decree, issued only 109 days before crucial parliamentary elections may be the escape route used by the ruling party to prevent an imminent and certain defeat, which would put the country and the entire region in a very serious risk of instability and violence,” warned the MUD the international community.
The opposition described these decrees as “inadequate,” on the grounds that “the situation of insecurity prevailing in the border and the economic crisis in this area caused by black markets and smuggling have deeply rooted causes, that started or aggravated in the last 17 years and that affect the entire country.”
The concern about the impact of states of emergency on the campaign reached the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), whose special rapporteur for freedom of expression, Edison Lanza, warned that restricting demonstrations and public events hindered the “dissemination of political ideas.”
The president of Colombia, Juan Manuel Santos, condemned the measure, and said that it should not be an excuse for violating human rights in the border area and reminded his counterpart Maduro that Bogotá “is not to blame for Venezuela’s problems. The border issues are not new (…) we need cooperation in the fight against crime and lawlessness.”
Despite critical voices raised both inside and outside the country, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court maintained its support for the government and provided legal grounds for the presidential determination to extend the state of emergency on the border.
Extract of the judgment
“(…) it clearly shows that the extension of the declaration of state of emergency is based on the fact that the original causes remain, which represents a systematic, unprecedented, progressive, continuing impediment to the full enjoyment and exercise of the rights of the inhabitants of the Republic, due to the presence of criminal and violent circumstances related to phenomena such as paramilitaries, drug trafficking and smuggling, organised at various scales, and other similar offenses taking place in the municipalities mentioned in the Decree under review. Therefore, it is necessary for the restoration of law and order and the normal development of the affected areas, the protection and safeguard of essential guarantees, both nationally and internationally, according to the law.”
Data sheet
Petitioner: President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela – Review of constitutionality
Time of response: 11 days (19/10/2015 – 30/10/2015)
Ruling: “(..) the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court finds the absolute, full and integral constitutionality of the decree under examination, which was enacted under all parameters provided in the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and Organic Law on States of Emergency and other applicable regulations, preserving human rights and protection of the Constitution, the State, its institutions and the people, which motivates this Constitutional Court to support the measures contained in the Decree under review of constitutionality issued by the President of the Republic in Council of Ministers, in recognition of its relevance, appropriateness and proportionality, which gives a solid legal foundation and high popular significance to the safeguard of the people and their harmonious development in face of adverse unprecedented and extraordinary factors in our country; this recognition also applies to the approval granted by the National Assembly in accordance with the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.”
Presenting Justice: joint resolution