Venezuelan coup d'etat*** If the Americas are not again to be put in a position of having to restore in democracy's name a leader who in many ways has worked against democracy, the (OAS) charter's standards should be refined and expanded beyond the mere focus on elections. There is a good reason why the charter focuses on elections. There is a consensus on what constitutes a free and fair election so that standards can be relatively precise and evenly applied. But standards for free and fair elections are not the last word. There are other norms and standards that could be similarly developed that would strengthen democratic practice and could be formulated with precision. Mr. Chavez used the device of a referendum to extend his term of office and also to lift the ban on Venezuela's presidents holding consecutive terms of office.The possibility of a creeping "auto-coup," as employed by Alberto Fujimori in Peru 10 years ago, was evident. It should be unacceptable, as a general norm, for constitutional or electoral changes to directly benefit the incumbent in this way. To give the incumbent such an advantage is self-dealing, subverting the rule of law - and the guarantees and expectations that are at the heart of the democratic bargain between the electors and the elected. Such referenda cannot meet the standards for a free and fair election. It would have been a violation of democratic norms (as well as a violation of the U.S. Constitution) had President Clinton, or Ronald Reagan or Dwight Eisenhower, proposed a constitutional amendment to lift the two-term limit on U.S. presidents so that they could stay in office. Globally, the growing phenomena of leaders, whether democratically elected or not (as in Pakistan), extending their terms of office through referenda has a stultifying effect on democratic development because it is, in essence, undemocratic.***
"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections. "--The US Supreme Court, West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 1943.