The right, as any work of man has been created for something, you have an ultimate goal which in turn is his reason for being. What is that "something" that the right want to achieve? Where do legal science is conducted? What are the values that are part of their "being" and that while he wants to enter the global society? We touch here the interesting question of the essence of law. For GERMAN ROJAS GONZALEZese "something" are the fundamental values of society. Others are the same legal values of all legislative system. The end is only the proposed point of arrival or the point where, lately, we've come. The end of a route. The point from where we can no longer further.
The ultimate achievement of an action, of an existence of a being. But do not forget, means the point where "we" arrive. The item proposed by our own reasoning as a stage where we want to achieve the ideal reach. The purpose is also implicit in the concept of desire, longing, aspiration. This ambiguity of expression is not uncommon to find authors as important as saying the same Aftalion Justice, the common good, peace, equity, security can never be considered as an end, it can never be achieved. "The end state is a proposal to our freedom as a point of arrival, a situation which is reached when the end actually performed. A goal is a state which is reached and, once achieved, must be abandoned, since the creative freedom of life can not stop.
The role of the Commission's work and plans to study reforms to our Constitution (or at least a part of it), and already is in possession of the President of the Republic for approval, was leaked to the media yesterday communication, a thick sheaf of papers which are printed, side items in the current Constitution, the other suggested amendments to each article and in the middle of both the comments that each amendment made by the members of the Commission. The Venezuelan Constitution in force, 1999, the "Bolivarian", or as he calls the president himself: "La Biche", besides being a defective Constitution and intentionally, as experience has amply demonstrated its approval, was presented for approval to a country that had not chosen with due care to members of the National Constituent Assembly that drafted; to a country that issued it, by voting in a referendum without having read the final text and a country that ignored allegations of changes or amendments, seemingly harmless, which were made to the wording of some items once approved and sanctioned. The Constitution also reformulated should be approved by referendum but experience tells us, first, that the bulk of the population does not take the trouble to read the whole thing and understand the real meaning of the changes before voting on it and on the other hand, not yet clear doubts about the transparency of the body responsible for conducting the referendum, the National Electoral Council, does nothing but raise concerns, especially after the utter failure of the recently convened conferences to collect signatures for the recall to regional governors and municipal (which by themselves warrant a full article on exclusivity). .