This is an excerpt from Isaac Saney's book CUBA: A REVOLUTION IN MOTION

It is such a great explanation (as is all of the book) that we just couldn't find a better summary anywhere else. Please visit the BOOKS section of this website to learn more about this book and how to purchase a copy.

---

On May 10, 2002, Osvaldo Paya, a representative of the Cuban Christian Liberation Movement, submitted a petition containing more than 11,000 signatures to the National Assembly. The petition was part of the Varela Project and was endorsed by GW Bush and Carter. It also continues to receive money from the US Interest Section in Havana. The petition contained 20 points calling for a broader freedom of expression and association, amnesty for political prisoners, property rights, free enterprise and changes in the current electoral system.

The petitioners stated that the right to present demands and request a referendum was guaranteed under articles 63 and 88 of the Constitution.

 

Art. 88 establishes that the right of legislative initiative, the right to present new laws to the National Assembly for consideration is granted to eight different entities:

 

Council of State

Council of Ministers

Commissions of the National Assembly of the People’s Power

Deputies of the National Assembly of the People’s Power

National Committee of the Central Organization of Cuban Workers and the national boards of the other mass and social orgs.

Supreme Popular Court (on matters related to justice)

Attorney General

 

AND the citizens (with the stricture that this right be exercised by at least ten thousand citizens who are eligible to vote.)

 

Art. 88 does not include the right to call for a referendum

 

Nor does it legally compel the National Assembly to do so in response to the exercise of the right to legislative initiative. This “would be absurd since it would mean that everyone of the {eight} persons and entities listed could insist on a popular referendum on any proposal.” A proposal presented to the National Assembly under Art.88 of the Constitution would be reviewed by a commission with

 

“jurisdiction over the subject matter and such commissions debate the proposal, suggest amendments vote on it and determine whether and when it should be introduced to the full legislative body.”

 

Likewise,  Art. 63 does not cover or deal with the issue of referenda. It focuses on the rights of citizens to lodge complaints and requests to the authorities and obtain, within a legally prescribed period, a reply. This article commonly applies to complaints brought to the Attorney Gen. office concerning denial of rights, seeking remedies to administrative decisions perceived to be unjust or redress of harms caused by a public agency.

 

Only the National Assembly, under Article 75, is authorized to call a referendum.

 

Thus it is necessary to differentiate between an initiative to pass a new law and an initiative to amend the Constitution.

The National Assembly has the power to amend particular sections of the Constitution. However, Art. 137 stipulated areas that

 

“cannot be amended or that require a broad spectrum of approval before they can be amended. That is why the Constitution contains an article that specifically states that certain issues in the Constitution may not be amended directly by the actual members of the Assembly, that is, they are reserved as intangible aspects… that must be protected”

 

In fact, the petitioners sought to bypass the legally established procedure by which the Constitution may be amended.

 

They wished to utilize a mechanism by which ordinary laws are proposed in order to alter the Constitution.

 

As the modification of a constitution, by definition, is an extraordinary legal act, all countries have very specific and special means and methods by which these changes can be made.

 

In legal terms, the Varela Project was invalid from the beginning, because attempted to achieve an objective through improper channels.

 

The Varela Project was more than just a legal exercise. It sought fundamental change in the arrangements that exist under the Cuban Revolution. At its core was the drive to dismantle the socialist state, reinstall capitalism and reverse the trajectory followed since 1959. The Cuban government characterized the Varela Project as

 

“part of a strategy of subversion against Cuba that has been conceived, financed and directed from abroad with the active participation of the US Interest Section in Havana. It is part of the same subversive design and has no basis whatsoever in Cuban law It is a crude manipulation of Cuba’s laws and Constitution. (Pérez Roque 2003)

 

During the trials of the 75 government opponents in April 2003, it was revealed that Osvaldo Alfonso had received money from Carlos Montaner—known CIA operative-and instructions on how to further advance the Varela Project. In a March 22, 2001, letter to Alfonso, Montaner communicated:

 

“Dear Osvaldo, a friend you know has been kind enough to get these 30,000 pesetas to you…. Very soon you will receive a call from some high-level Spanish friends to talk about the Varela Project. I recommended 5 names to found this new idea: Paya, Alfonso, Arcos, Rivero and Tania Quintero……”

 

In response to the 11,000 signatures: in June 2002, more than 8 million Cubans mobilized around a petition organized by the mass organizations, to declare the socialist foundations of the Republic of Cuba “untouchable”. In a special sitting lasting three days, the National Assembly voted to declare the socialist system to be “irrevocable”.