The Academy of Political and Social Sciences of Venezuela urged this Tuesday to resolve the vacancy situation in the Presidency, appealing to the mechanisms established in the Constitution, after serving more than 90 days since the capture of Nicolás Maduro.
The institution recalled in a statement in
He warned that maintaining an unelected authority in the exercise of the Executive Power indefinitely contravenes the democratic principle and affects the original legitimacy of the presidential office.
He stressed that the executive vice president is not a popularly elected official, but rather a direct appointment of the head of state, so “it does not have democratic legitimacy”.
Maduro’s absence generates uncertainty in the political landscape
The Academy He recalled that in cases of temporary or absolute absence of the president, the constitutional order provides for a temporary solution.
He pointed out that in accordance with articles 233 and 234, “the executive vice president must assume the position temporarily, on a strictly provisional basis and for the periods established in the Constitution.”
After the arrest of Nicolás Maduro on January 3, Delcy Rodríguez was sworn in as interim president by decision of the Supreme Court of Justice on January 5, with the argument of guaranteeing the administrative continuity of the State.
In accordance with article 234 of the Magna Carta, the president’s temporary absences must be made up for by the executive vice president for a period of up to 90 days, extendable by decision of Parliament for a similar period. If the absence extends beyond that time, it is up to the Legislative Branch to determine whether an absolute absence is constituted.
However, the political scenario has remained without a clear definition. On March 2, the president of the National Assembly, Jorge Rodríguez, said that elections will be held in the country, although he maintained that the immediate priority is economic recovery.
He assured that it is not “peremptory” to set a date for the elections. He also maintained that the situation derived from the capture of Maduro is not expressly contemplated in the Constitution, so in his opinion the period of 180 days established for other cases of temporary absence does not apply.
