Venezuela: The risk of changing so everything stays the same

The reinstitutionalization of Venezuela — which has been so widely discussed in recent weeks — remains to be seen. Fears are growing about a superficial change, where everything changes so that nothing actually changes. The official commitment to holding presidential elections remains vague. The country is still waiting for economic improvements. The early political overtures don’t seem – for the moment – to be sufficient. Opposition politicians don’t trust President Delcy Rodríguez’s intentions, while reluctance persists in some sectors of the ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV). New scandals are emerging: more political prisoners have died in official custody, in a murky context that has generated widespread shock.

For weeks, Venezuela has been trapped in a debate that affects everything. What needs to change before elections can be held? Since U.S. special forces captured Nicolás Maduro on January 3, the country has been experiencing what some would call an opening. Others, more cautiously, observe a mere reshuffling of the regime. There’s been no dismantling of the repressive apparatus, nor any reinstitutionalization of key bodies, such as the National Electoral Council (CNE).

Meanwhile, pressure is mounting from all sides. The opposition is demanding a “comprehensive reinstitutionalization,” which includes the renewal of the CNE, the full restoration of political rights, as well as an end to persecution. Civil society organizations are moving in the same direction: they affirm that rebuilding the state’s capacity to organize and arbitrate elections has become an essential task for any transition to take place.

The regime, for its part, hasn’t set any dates or timelines. And, amid this uncertainty, the question arises again: are the changes taking place the beginning of something real, or simply a tactic to remain in power?

With the United States present in Caracas, a process of political reform has begun in Venezuela, giving many people hope that there will be a return to democracy. Media controls have been relaxed and the security police have withdrawn from the streets. Key figures in civil society have also been replaced, such as the attorney general and the ombudsman. And, while the new appointees aren’t exactly opposition members, they’re replacing highly-recognizable figures from Maduro’s repressive era (2013-2026). A reform of the Supreme Court — co-opted by loyalists of the former presidential couple — has been underway since January. Changes have also been made to the composition of the Central Bank of Venezuela.

Interim President Delcy Rodríguez has relied on her party’s parliamentary majority to adapt the Bolivarian Revolution — which began in 1999, when Hugo Chávez began his presidential administration (1999-2013) — to new realities, while attempting to diminish the influence of Maduro’s regime. Her personal style is less intrusive. In all parts of her administration, priority has been given to hiring professionals with technical credentials (preferably those within the revolutionary movement). The United States, meanwhile, is promising investments: temporary licences are being issued for oil exploration. The interest in the country’s natural resources isn’t being concealed.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking from Washington, has outlined three phases for Venezuela in 2026: stabilization, recovery and transition. Diplomatic personnel stationed in Caracas have suggested that the country might be nearing the end of the first phase, but that’s all. There are no timelines for elections; no dates are being discussed openly. Not even by the United States.

According to experts, the path to free elections must inevitably lead to a reform of the National Electoral Council (CNE), as well as changes to the law that governs its operation. In Venezuela, this institution holds the status of an autonomous public power, and it’s the only one that hasn’t been touched by the regime in this process of opening up. This is an area of the state where Jorge Rodríguez — head of the National Assembly and brother of the acting president — has wielded enormous power for years. The current director of the CNE, Elvis Amoroso, is also very close to former First Lady Cilia Flores, both personally and politically.

“For me, what needs to happen is a political agreement, in which this parliament appoints a provisional CNE, with five directors elected according to the constitutional requirements,” says lawyer Delsa Solórzano. She’s the founder of a political party, Encuentro Ciudadano (“Citizens’ Meeting”), and one of the leaders of the Plataforma Unitaria (“Unitary Platform”), an alliance that supports María Corina Machado.

“That CNE must organize the pending electoral processes,” Solórzano affirms. From where she stands, without this, progress will be impossible. “Political parties don’t have electoral [registrations]; they were all taken from us. Several parties within the Unitary Platform are under judicial review. Almost half of the opposition politicians are barred from holding office. It’s necessary to purge the Electoral Registry, provide security for poll workers — who were harshly repressed by the regime during the last presidential elections — and create provisions to [include] citizens from the diaspora [on the voting rolls],” she lists.

The Unitary Platform, a coalition that brings together the largest Venezuelan opposition parties, has presented its roadmap for restoring constitutional order in the country. In addition to institutional reform and the return of the opposition’s political rights, the Platform deems credible international observation of elections to be necessary. The coalition also wants guarantees for all political sectors, as well as a negotiated transition with a phased timeline.

“The vacant presidency is now an undeniable truth,” says Juan Carlos Apitz, the dean of the Law School at the Central University of Venezuela. “With a presidential vacancy, it’s imperative to call for elections now.” According to Apitz, “the regime is attempting to make cosmetic changes in order to buy time.” However, he cautions, “the truth is that, so long as the repressive apparatus remains intact, everything will stay the same. The core ideology of [the Chavista regime] is intact.”

The date of presidential or general elections in Venezuela remains a mystery. Delcy Rodríguez says that they’ll take place “someday.” Minister of Interior Diosdado Cabello has stated that they’ll be held “when they have to be held.” Politicians from minority parties that collaborate with the ruling PSUV – such as Bernabé Gutiérrez – have stated that elections should be held in 2030. The opposition sectors whose presence is tolerated in parliament are betting on 2028. Meanwhile, the Unitary Platform argues that they shouldn’t be held later than 2027, under any circumstances. Vente Venezuela, María Corina Machado’s party, is actively working on forming its campaign team, with an eye toward elections in the near future.

On the other hand, the institutional framework of Hugo Chávez’s Bolivarian Revolution prefers staggered elections, with presidential elections held separately from parliamentary elections. The ruling party also wants gubernatorial and mayoral elections to be held separately, with the aim of maintaining significant territorial power. A new president in Venezuela would currently find that the National Assembly, along with 23 of the 24 state governorships, are controlled by the PSUV.

For Apitz, the institutional outcome in Venezuela has a political component, more than a legal one: “We’re [living] in a dictatorship overseen by the United States. Everything here will be an imposition, and we’ll have to make things happen. I think that a presidential election in which the opposition sweeps the vote — which is what should happen — could have a very strong effect on the entire political landscape, finally weakening the regime.”

“Neither the Rodríguez siblings nor the Americans want elections soon, that’s obvious,” says Juan Rafalli, a constitutional lawyer and postgraduate professor at the Andrés Bello Catholic University. “What I think is that prolonging the current situation is unsustainable, especially for the United States, because it has costs. A full economic recovery in the country is impossible without political change. The [ongoing] modifications to the Supreme Court will try to give the impression of openness, by increasing the number of justices. [But while there] are quotas for the opposition, the regime will maintain a majority.”

“The institutional renewal process being carried out by the regime is happening behind the people’s backs. That’s regrettable,” says Enrique Márquez, a leader of the moderate opposition and a former political prisoner. Márquez advocates for a gradual process, forged within the regime itself, in which opportunities can be opened through pressure, persuasion and commitment. “I consider myself a supporter of the plan proposed by Marco Rubio. It’s a design that has a process within it… one that requires patience and hard work.”

“Elections this year are unfeasible, for technical and political reasons,” argues Vicente Díaz, a sociologist and former rector of the National Electoral Council (CNE), who believes that urgent changes to the Organic Law of Electoral Processes (LOPRE) are necessary to hold them. “If the CNE doesn’t change, we can’t think about anything yet.”

Díaz has a positive view about the events that have taken place in recent weeks. He prefers to wait. “Political changes have occurred that were unthinkable four months ago. There’s been progress, although not everything has been achieved. Institutional changes such as the appointment of the ombudsman [by the National Assembly] have been important,” he argues.

The vast majority of the population wants change. And María Corina Machado, the most influential leader within the anti-Chavista movement, is the only politician who has explicitly stated the need to expedite an electoral timetable. But it’s not even known when she’ll be able to return to the country.

Machado also supports promoting and approving a new Constitution to definitively leave behind the influence of the Chavista ideology. However, experts view this proposal with reservations. Apitz believes that “if there’s one thing that has united democratic forces in recent years, it’s the defense of the current constitutional framework.” Constitutional expert Rafalli believes that reforming it would be “a mistake.”

“This Constitution is democratic enough to work with,” he argues. “It needs reforms. [And] there can be agreements on that: reducing the bias [in favor of the executive branch], bringing back the Senate, approving a two-round electoral system... but we must be careful not to repeat [Hugo] Chávez’s mistake and impose a worldview on others.”

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition