Constitutional Lawyer Warns: Deadline to Call Presidential Elections is May 3rd

Venezuela stands at a critical legal precipice, with a constitutional lawyer issuing a stark warning about the impending deadline to call presidential elections. Juan Carlos Apitz, a constitutional lawyer and dean, has highlighted that the acting president, Delcy Rodríguez, faces a legal abyss if the constitutional timelines for convening new elections are not met.

“

If they do not call elections, there is an indisputable issue: Delcy Rodríguez would be exercising the presidency of the Republic illegitimately, which would constitute a usurpation of authority.

Apitz meticulously breaks down the constitutional framework, explaining that the president's absence is limited to an initial 90-day period. This period concluded on April 3rd without the National Assembly officially declaring an extension. Following this, the Constitution allows an additional 30-day window to call for elections, a deadline that irrevocably falls on May 3rd. The lawyer unequivocally states that failure to call elections by this date would render Delcy Rodríguez's continued presidency illegitimate, amounting to a clear usurpation of authority.

“

all national interest contracts — including oil and mining — signed under a usurping authority lack legal validity.

The ramifications of such a situation extend far beyond political posturing. Apitz emphasizes that any official act undertaken by an illegitimate authority would be legally null and void. This includes all national contracts, such as those in the oil and mining sectors, which would become invalid under Article 132 of the Constitution. Such a scenario would create profound legal uncertainty, potentially paralyzing key economic sectors as international investors would face the nullification of their agreements, as reported by El Nacional.

“

Investors would face the nullity of their agreements before the law, which would paralyze strategic sectors of the economy.

Furthermore, Apitz expressed bewilderment at Rodríguez's recent statements regarding the Amnesty Law. He questioned the official stance, noting that laws are only repealed by subsequent legislation and do not expire. This, he suggests, indicates a tacit admission by the ruling party of its failure to implement the law effectively. The constitutional lawyer's analysis underscores the gravity of the upcoming deadline and the potential for severe legal and economic consequences should Venezuela fail to adhere to its constitutional mandate for presidential elections.

“

The Amnesty Law had no expiration date. What we see is a recognition of the failure in the application of this law by the ruling party.