Although she was on medical leave, which caused her absence from the Communist Party’s political commission meeting last Saturday, House President Karol Cariola (PC) addressed potential censure threats through social media.
The proposed measure, which would only affect her role as president but not her position in the House, was suggested by Deputy Johannes Kaiser (an independent affiliated with the Christian Social bench) following comments made by PC President Lautaro Carmona, who claimed that the regime of Nicolas Maduro “is not a dictatorship.”
Although the communist leader asserted in an interview with TVN that he spoke on behalf of the party, his remarks did not align with the official declaration made by the PC during the political commission meeting that Cariola missed, which sought to maintain neutrality amid the internal divisions caused by the Venezuelan issue. Consequently, his statements also unsettled some party members who privately believe that Maduro exhibits dictatorial tendencies.
In fact, weeks earlier, Cariola had indirectly referenced Maduro, stating that “the behavior of the candidate who declares himself the winner is clearly authoritarian and dictatorial.“
In light of Kaiser’s renewed attack, having previously attempted to censure Cariola unsuccessfully in early August, the House President responded by suggesting that she disagreed with her party president’s recent comments. “It is unjust for me to be judged or censored for statements that do not belong to me. I take responsibility for my words, actions, and decisions and am willing to be held accountable for them; however, it is neither right nor fair to be judged for remarks made by others,” the communist deputy expressed on her X account, indicating she might not attend Congress on Monday.
“As for the situation in Venezuela, I have represented my own views and publicly conveyed the position of the State of Chile based on President Gabriel Boric’s statements, as he leads the country’s international policy,” she explained. She added, “I have defended this position in every debate forum I’ve participated in because I have a strong democratic conviction regarding this matter.”
Finally, she questioned Kaiser’s previous support for the coup in Chile. “It seems inconsistent, and somewhat hypocritical, for someone to advocate for a censure merely based on my membership without considering my actions, as our corporation’s regulations suggest, especially when just days ago he publicly stated on television that he still supports the criminal dictatorship that once ruled our country and the genocidal dictator Augusto Pinochet,” Cariola concluded.
The story continues below
More about Karol Cariola
Earlier on social media, Kaiser asserted that “the ongoing presence of a PC member leading the Chamber of Deputies has become untenable,” especially in light of the party president’s recent comments supporting the Maduro regime. He added that he would advocate for a censure motion from the board. It is now up to other opposition factions if they wish to co-sponsor this initiative with their committee heads’ signatures,” he posted.
His call resonated only with UDI bench leader Gustavo Benavente, who stated, “The Venezuelan people are being slaughtered by a brutal dictatorship. A member of a party supporting this dictatorship cannot preside over the Chamber, which is a republican institution.”
However, by the time of this publication, Deputy Francesca Muñoz, leader of the Christian Social Party, in which Kaiser is a member, had not yet commented on whether a censure would be filed, as it is her responsibility to submit the removal request.
Other opposition groups also appeared hesitant to mount an offensive. Requesting anonymity, right-wing legislators expressed that there are no grounds to dismiss Cariola, whose leadership in the debates has received positive evaluations.
Deputy leader of the RN bench, Hugo Rey, even cautioned that a censure lacking a strong basis could end up “strengthening Karol Cariola.” “We need to engage with centrist parties because I don’t want us to keep wasting time,” he added.
The leader of the Democratic-Independents caucus, Joanna Perez, distanced herself from this offensive. “We are aware that the Communist Party does not possess the necessary democratic credentials regarding the dictatorship and electoral fraud in Venezuela (…). Nevertheless, I believe this is an issue that Congresswoman Cariola should address on behalf of her party; we think it’s essential to focus on the problems and urgent needs of citizens, and we have not engaged in any discussions with the right on this matter,” she remarked.
Karol Cariola Faces Censure Threat Amid Venezuela Controversy
Despite being on medical leave, Karol Cariola (PC), the president of the House of Deputies in Chile, responded through social media to threats of censure during a recent political commission meeting. Her absence was due to medical reasons, but her political stance found itself under scrutiny following statements made by Lautaro Carmona, president of the Communist Party, regarding the Venezuelan regime.
The Background of the Controversy
The censure measure, which would only affect Cariola’s role as president but not her seat, was proposed by deputy Johannes Kaiser (independent, affiliated with the Christian Social bench). Kaiser’s call for censure arose after Carmona controversially declared that the regime of Nicolás Maduro “is not a dictatorship.” This assertion has sparked significant discontent not just among the public but also internally within the party.
Cariola’s Challenge and Political Landscape
Though Carmona claimed to express the official party line during an interview on TVN, his statements contradicted the PC’s agreed-upon position during the political commission meeting, which aimed to represent a more neutral stance amidst a growing division over the issue of Venezuela.
The divide is evident, with some PC militants privately voicing their discomfort with Carmona’s remarks, indicating a belief that Maduro’s actions fit a more authoritarian model. Weeks prior, Cariola herself noted in a discussion that “the attitude taken by the candidate who proclaims himself the winner is clearly an authoritarian and dictatorial attitude,” indirectly alluding to Maduro.
Cariola’s Response to Censure Threat
Faced with the censure proposal, Cariola took to social media to clarify her position. She stated, “It is not fair to me to be judged or censored for statements that do not belong to me. I take responsibility for my words, actions, and decisions, and I am willing to be judged for them; but it is not right or fair to do so for statements made by third parties.”
As she outlined her role, she mentioned, “As President of the Chamber, I have represented the position of the State of Chile, reflecting the statements of President Gabriel Boric, who leads our country’s international policy.”
Kaiser’s Position and Political Repercussions
In the wake of the ongoing tensions, Kaiser argued that “the permanence of a member of the PC at the head of the Chamber of Deputies becomes unsustainable” considering the recent support expressed by the PC leadership towards Maduro. Despite the lack of broader coalition support in Congress, Kaiser advocates further organizational steps for censure.
Support and Opposition for Censure
Interestingly, Kaiser’s proposal did not resonate widely among the opposition. The head of the UDI bench, Gustavo Benavente, supported Kaiser’s motion, remarking, “The Venezuelan people are being massacred by a cruel dictatorship. A member of a party that supports this dictatorship cannot preside over the Chamber, which is a republican institution.”
However, others in the opposition displayed hesitance. Francesca Muñoz, leader of the Christian Social Party, had yet to clarify her stance on formally proceeding with the censure. Old-school right-wing legislators noted concerns, suggesting that censure without solid grounds could potentially bolster Cariola’s position.
The Role of Centro in the Current Political Climate
While debates regarding the censure continue, some centrist politicians have distanced themselves from actively pursuing this motion. Joanna Perez from the Democratic-Independents caucus emphasized the need to focus on pressing citizen issues rather than internal party conflicts. Her remarks reflected a broader sentiment that while the views of the Communist Party regarding Venezuela need addressing, it is ultimately Cariola’s responsibility to account for her party’s positions, not to mention the increasing urgency of constituents’ needs.
Public and Party Reaction
The ongoing controversy has sparked a public conversation about Chile’s geopolitical stance and the implications of party members’ individual statements. As Cariola prepares to tackle the issues arising from her party’s internal conflicts, sentiment among the Chilean populace remains mixed, reflecting a spectrum of opinions regarding the Communist Party’s view on international authoritarian regimes.
Implications of the Censure Debate
- Political Stability: The censure debate raises questions about the internal cohesion of the PC and its public image.
- International Relations: Chile’s position on Venezuela can influence its relationships with other South American countries.
- Public Sentiment: The issue highlights the political divide within Chile’s legislative bodies and its reflection in public opinion.
