The Venezuelan economy walks in the dark. Although Article 319 of the Constitution obliges the Central Bank of Venezuela to deliver “periodic reports on the behaviour of the macroeconomic variables of the nation,” this institution has stopped publishing data as basic and necessary for planning as those related to inflation and shortage.
Based on the provisions of the Constitution, Transparency Venezuela appeared on July 14, 2015 before the Political-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) to request the Court to demand the Central Bank to fulfil its constitutional duty.
Transparency Venezuela reminded the judges that the Central Bank “has not published the information on macroeconomic variables from January to July” 2015, and warned that this situation “creates a climate of uncertainty that discourages investment and negatively impacts expectations of various economic agents in the country.”
The Supreme Court responded on August 4, 2015, in a presentation by Justice María Carolina Ameliach, vice president of the Political-Administrative Chamber. Ameliach rejected the demand of Transparency Venezuela arguing that “it did not produce any proof of the efforts made to request and obtain from the President of the Central Bank of Venezuela compliance with the obligation of accountability.”
In short: the Supreme Court used technicalities to avoid ruling on the core issue, which is the fact that the BCV disrespects the Constitution by keeping the indicators of the national economy in a black box.
Extract of the judgment
This Court notes that the petitioner has not produced evidence of the efforts made to request and obtain from the President of the Central Bank of Venezuela compliance with the obligation of accountability (…) the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the publication of key economic statistics of the country established in (…) the Decree-Law of Partial Reform Law of the Central Bank of Venezuela (…). Therefore, as the requirements provided for in Article 66 of the Organic Law of Administrative Jurisdiction are not fulfilled, this Court declares this petition inadmissible (…)”.
