Ten conclusions to understand the constitutional crisis in Venezuela

Talk with La Alianza, Harvard University, January 9, 2025

Source: NMAS

1. A constitutional vacuum emerged after the presidential election on July 28 because the Electoral National Council did not proclaim the elected president based on transparent, public, and accountable vote tallies.
2. The Council’s proclamation of Maduro on July 29 resulted from illegitimate actions that produced no legal effects. This fraudulent proclamation lacked support from vote tallies or the electronic dissemination of the electoral results, as required by the electoral law.
3. Furthermore, the Council violated all legally mandated electoral audits, particularly the citizen audit of the vote tallies. These illegitimate actions continued as the Council neglected its obligation to publish the results in the Official Gazette. 
4. To simulate those violations, Maduro filed a claim requesting that the Electoral Chamber of the Supreme Tribunal certify the results announced by the Council on the 29th. However, the Chamber lacks the authority to certify these results. Also, the Chamber produced a so-called expert report that violated due process and is therefore null and void. The Constitutional Chamber upheld the ruling of the Electoral Chamber, further entrenching the authoritarian judicial review over the elections. 
5. In turn, the electoral observers of the Unitary Platform obtained authentic and original versions of nearly all the vote tallies from polling stations that were digitized and published online. These are not copies of the vote tallies, nor are they the opposition’s tallies. They are legitimate administrative documents issued by the formalities prescribed by electoral law. 
6. Those original tallies show that Edmundo González won the election, making him the elected president. However, the National Electoral Council chose to disregard the vote tallies and create unaccountable results in favor of Maduro. 
7. Under Article 228 of the Venezuelan Constitution, Maduro is not the legitimate elected president, as he did not receive the majority of the votes. The vote tallies indicate that González received the majority of the votes.
8. Since he is not the elected president, Maduro lacks the constitutional authority to be sworn in as president before the National Assembly, according to Art 233. 
9. The swearing-in ceremony is more than just a formality; it symbolizes a continuation of the principle of transparency that should accompany all stages of the presidential election (Art. 294). Under the current constitutional conditions, Maduro’s swearing-in will be as fraudulent as his proclamation or the abusive judicial review conducted by the Supreme Court Tribunal.
10. After January 10, if Maduro remains in power, he will continue to usurp the presidency, rendering all his actions illegitimate according to Article 138. From a constitutional law perspective, swearing-in will be meaningless because only the legitimately elected president can be inaugurated. The blatant usurpation of the Venezuelan people’s free will, as shown in the vote tallies, obliges “every citizen, whether or not vested with official authority” to contribute to the restoration of the Constitution and the people’s sovereignty, as stated in Articles 4 and 333.