From the point of view of citizens’ rights, the political operation orchestrated by the project started by Hugo Chávez and inherited by Nicolás Maduro has maintained two fundamental axes. On the political axis, the focus has been the concentration of power in the executive, the suppression of the separation of powers, the tireless promotion of a single leader and the annulment of the mediating institutions such as the governorships and mayoralties. On the economic axis, the strategic orientation has been the submission of the oil industry to the political interests of the so-called “Bolivarian” project. This operation has had as its central characteristic the use of the state oil company, PDVSA, as an entity destined to directly execute government plans regarding food distribution and other welfare policies, in opposition to the previously prevailing criterion that prioritized the development of technical capabilities, innovation in energy generation and the constant improvement of the economic benefits that the company delivered to the treasury.
This “PDVSA of the people” has been run by political operators and not by oil managers. The difference between the two profiles is radical: the oil manager usually has a technical background in the area, and his outlook tends to value the need to protect an industry whose importance is so central that the national budget largely depends on it, so he is much less attentive to the immediate political environment than to medium and long-term planning. The political operator is different. His link with the company depends on the favor and grace of the political leader, and satisfying his needs is essential. Thus, we have seen how people who have occupied the presidency of PDVSA behave like politicians in campaign, repeating the executive’s propaganda in an active and tireless proselytism.
Thus, PDVSA has stopped being a reliable provider of resources for the financing of the state apparatus of a democratic system and for its traditional international commercial partners, and has become one more dependency of a populist public administration in an authoritarian framework. This involvement of the oil company in partisan politics has brought with it a brutal collapse in business performance: of the 3.2 million barrels produced daily since 1970, 0.7 million are currently produced. This is one of the clearest reasons for the humanitarian crisis in Venezuela: daily power cuts, lack of health services and a huge migration seeking to escape precarious conditions. And the people who have been at the head of PDVSA received a position with joy only to later find out that it was a dangerous assignment. Let’s see.
Over the course of 25 years, the Bolivarian regime has appointed 10 people to the presidency of PDVSA. Of these, five have died. One of them, Guaicaipuro Lameda, perhaps the only one against whom there are no suspicions about his honesty, has an arrest warrant. Nelson Martínez was arrested and died while in prison. Another, Eulogio Delpino, is in custody. Rafael Ramírez, the most conspicuous in the open exercise of politics to the detriment of his role as president of a public company, has an arrest warrant. A very particular case is that of Tareck El Aissami, who resigned unexpectedly and was “missing” for a year, without the police authorities giving any information about his whereabouts, and then was publicly exposed as detained.
Last week, despite the fact that a few days earlier Nicolás Maduro had publicly praised him, the most recent president of PDVSA, Pedro Tellechea, was arrested. Thus, out of ten people who have played this role, only four have not been arrested or accused by the government itself of acts of corruption, perhaps because most of them have died.
This is very striking, and it reveals the clientelist and politicized use of the country’s main resource, but the serious thing is that this clientelist use for personal ends and for the political project has meant the ruin of the company and has destroyed the heritage of Venezuelans. The level of affectation of oil income is perhaps the main cause of the very serious situation of citizens who see their rights to a health system, to drinking water and to quality education violated daily.
However, even more serious is the fact that these arrests occur in a context of great opacity. These officials are arrested when they lose political utility for the regime, and they are accused of acts of corruption without any formality and in open violation of their rights, as well as the right of Venezuelan society to know the management of those who manage the resources of all. There is no information about the accusations, there is no right to defense, in short, there is no rule of law.
Thus, once again there is a lack of respect for institutions, as the international community has seen in the presidential elections of July 28, when the regime openly altered the results to claim a victory it did not have.
A question that should be asked in the face of these repeated scandals and their consequences for the health of the Venezuelan economy is: How do countries like the US expect to maintain a healthy and transparent relationship regarding oil licensing, when at least 50% of the presidents of the state oil company are facing trials for corruption, by an equally corrupt government? The inability and voracity sustained over more than 20 years in managing the oil business should invite reflection by actors like the US. A capricious and non-transparent handling of sanctions, inconsistent with the reasons initially invoked for their imposition, not only does not favor the population whose rights they claim to defend, but could be endorsing the corruption of the actors who manage the oil sector from the government.
International actors have warned of the complex situation in Venezuela, the violation of human rights, the institutional crisis and the serious social situation of a people deprived of the most basic resources for maintaining a dignified life. It is therefore imperative to continue to demand the return of democratic principles and, crucially, independent international verification of the election results. Although it is very convenient for creditors, the granting of licenses is not merely a financial matter, as it has serious implications for the political message it sends to a corrupt and dictatorial government, after its attempt to ignore the popular will.