That's correct. We should not create an image in our minds. That is one of the aspects I would like to submit to your deliberations. The situation in Venezuela should not be viewed as a type of totalitarianism, and I use this term loosely, where people do not have the right to express their views or indicate their disagreement with government policy. That is not the case. Political debate takes place. There are civil society organizations. I mentioned PROVEA, for instance. It is the largest human rights NGO, and it produces annual reports. I have them here with me, I have studied them closely. I can tell you that this organization, which has a great deal of credibility, is very critical of what is happening in Venezuela. However, some of this contributes to defining a genuine social debate. Therefore, the opposition does express its views. Obviously, it is not unfettered, there are problems when it comes to freedom of expression, but in a general sense, Venezuela should not be seen as a society which is closed to discussion or dissension. As I mentioned, the trend within some circles is troubling, but overall, it is far from being a society that has shut down political debate and dissension.
On May 6th, 2010. See this statement in context.