Washington Post
I have also gone to FreedomHouseChavez's Censorship
Where 'Disrespect' Can Land You in Jail
By Jackson Diehl
Monday, March 28, 2005; Page A17
Venezuela's minister of communication and information, Andres Izarra, recently accused The Post and several other American media of being part of a campaign to defame Venezuela directed by the Bush administration and funded by the State Department. Apparently I drew Izarra's attention by writing several columns and editorials lamenting President Hugo Chavez's assault on press freedom and the independent judiciary and his support for anti-democratic movements elsewhere in Latin America.
One of the journalists libeled by Izarra pointed out that he had no evidence to back up his accusations. According to the newspaper El Universal, that inspired the following outburst, in Spanish, from the cabinet minister: "Mister gringo, be sure that we are going to come back to defeat you . . . because we work with the truth, we have spirit and above all something very special, a leader who unites and inspires us, the commandante Chavez!"
It's easy to laugh at such buffoonery if, like me, you have the privilege of working for an independent newspaper in a capital where demagogues such as Izarra aren't taken seriously. In Caracas, however, the minister's rantings -- and those of his master, Chavez -- are no longer funny. Beginning this month journalists or other independent activists accused by the government of the sort of offenses alleged by Izarra can be jailed without due process and sentenced to up to 30 years.
To be sure, much of the Venezuelan media has aggressively opposed Chavez's populist "Bolivarian revolution," though not without reason: The former coup-plotting colonel is well on his way to destroying what was once the most stable and prosperous democracy in Latin America. Some newspapers and television stations openly sided with attempts to oust the president via coup, strike or a national referendum. Having survived all three, a strengthened Chavez is moving to eliminate critical journalists and create in Venezuela the kind of state-controlled media environment in which a minister of information such as Izarra is all-powerful.
The first step was a new media content law, adopted by the Chavez-controlled legislature last December, that subjects broadcast media to heavy fines or the loss of their licenses for disseminating information deemed "contrary to national security." Its impact was soon felt: Two of the most prominent anti-government journalists lost their jobs as anchors on morning television shows, and Venezuelans quickly noticed the appearance of self-censorship among those who remained.
Ten days ago Chavez handed Izarra a still-bigger stick: a new penal code that criminalizes virtually any expression to which the government objects -- not only in public but also in private.
Start with Article 147: "Anyone who offends with his words or in writing or in any other way disrespects the President of the Republic or whomever is fulfilling his duties will be punished with prison of 6 to 30 months if the offense is serious and half of that if it is light." That sanction, the code implies, applies to those who "disrespect" the president or his functionaries in private; "the term will be increased by a third if the offense is made publicly."
There's more: Article 444 says that comments that "expose another person to contempt or public hatred" can bring a prison sentence of one to three years; Article 297a says that someone who "causes public panic or anxiety" with inaccurate reports can receive five years. Prosecutors are authorized to track down allegedly criminal inaccuracies not only in newspapers and electronic media, but also in e-mail and telephone communications.
The new code reserves the toughest sanctions for journalists or others who receive foreign funding, such as the election monitoring group Sumate, which has been funded in part by the National Endowment for Democracy. Venezuelans or foreigners living in the country can be punished with a 10- to 15-year sentence for receiving foreign support that "can prejudice the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela . . . or destabilize the social order," whatever that means. Persons accused of conspiring against the government with a foreign country can get 20 to 30 years in prison. The new code specifies that anyone charged with these crimes will not be entitled to legal due process. In other words, should Izarra determine that my Caracas-based colleagues continue to collude with the State Department against Venezuela, they could be summarily jailed.
Chavez and his propaganda apparatus don't feel compelled to live by their own rules. The president has directed crude epithets at President Bush and even more vulgar sexual innuendo at Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. His government has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund Americans in the United States who write articles and letters glorifying Chavez and attacking the Bush administration. Izarra himself could be charged under his own slander law for his false claims about American journalists. Lucky for him his adversaries here are a democratic government, and a columnist who merely thinks he's ridiculous.
Freedomhouse.org
When you start throwing rocks... Make sure you're not in a glass house.August 3, 2006 –
Hugo Chavez's febrile brand of politics has sent ripples throughout Latin America, causing concerns both inside and outside the region about a possible contagion of authoritarian populism. With much of President Chavez's energies seemingly devoted to issues beyond Venezuela's borders -- railing against the United States in particular -- what often gets lost is the impact that Chavez-style governance is having at home on Venezuela's crucial institutions.
A study being released today by Freedom House reveals the extent of the erosion of democratic institutions. The findings on Venezuela in Countries at the Crossroads suggest that chavismo may be exerting irrevocable harm upon indispensable institutions, including the judiciary and the news media.
The study covers events in 2004 and 2005 and examines key areas of governance in 30 strategically important countries. It shows that Venezuela's scores have dropped across the board, in all four indicators of good governance addressed in the study: accountability and public voice, civil liberties, rule of law, and anti-corruption and transparency. In fact, only Nepal, Zimbabwe, and Nigeria have experienced a greater net change for the worse.
More corruption
Particularly disturbing is Venezuela's sharp decline in governmental transparency and the general environment against corruption. In this category, Venezuela has dropped from the top to the bottom third of the countries examined, since the last review in 2004. During this time, the government has increased significantly its command over the economy, providing state officials with mounting opportunities for personal enrichment.
Since 2004, Venezuela has also seen a number of legislative acts and court decisions that are at odds with a system that respects press freedom. Among these restrictive measures is a July 2004 act that allows the government to monitor the work of journalists. The law provides for compulsory registration with the national journalism association and punishes reporters' "illegal" conduct with prison sentences.
Moreover, the Law on the Social Responsibility of Radio and TV, which took effect in December 2004, gives the government control over the content of radio and television programs. The president has at the same time undertaken a vigorous campaign to marginalize the opposition and curb dissenting voices. In a move to inhibit public criticism, in March 2005 the government amended Venezuela's criminal code to expand laws that punish "disrespect for government authorities."
A 'blacklist of political opponents' has been created, which effectively has denied access to state jobs and services to many thousands of Venezuelans deemed Chavez-unfriendly. Very alarming is the proposed Law of International Cooperation, which will severely damage the ability of Venezuelan nongovernmental organizations to work independently by creating excessive obstacles for both registration and access to funds.
High oil prices have so far offered a cushion for the inefficiency and corruption that are burgeoning in Venezuela, but this oil wealth cannot mask the flaws of Chavez's governance indefinitely. The more that democratic institutions and accountability are abused, the more capricious and corrupt the Venezuelan system will become.
Voters abstaining
There is evidence to suggest Venezuelans already may be growing tired of Chavez's act. The country's shrinking accountability has brought with it rising corruption and mismanagement. A significant number of voters apparently voted with their feet in last December's elections for the National Assembly -- by not moving them and staying at home. Only 25 percent of the electorate participated in the election.
However, given the opposition's disengagement and weak level of support and with less than five months until December's elections, it is very likely that Chavez will win another six-year term.
Venezuela sorely needs a normalization of its politics and a change in the trajectory of its governance. But such a normalization is becoming an ever taller order with all of the country's critical power institutions now in the hands of Chavez supporters, no meaningful challenge to decision making from the government's legislative branch, and a judiciary ever more dependent on the executive.