countries of the communist orbit established— without any doctrine in jurisprudence and law— the " right " of the Communist Party to be the only one in nations under the " dictatorship of the proletariat." Like the acquisitive prescription, by which ownership of property can be gained by possession of it beyond a certain period of time, the " legalized " praxis in such States spread, but unlike the aforementioned method it was never acknowledged by a notarial deed that certified and justified the right of the single party on the basis of the political fact of its own existence. Regardless of the need to address this article— after being analyzed by independent lawyers— in order to reform the electoral system, the option of political plurality is open from the viewpoint of the association law, which shall be also subjected to reform. A reform of this article involves the abrogation or modification of Article 62:“ None of the freedoms which are recognized for citizens can be exercised contrary to what is established in the Constitution and the law, or contrary to the existence and objectives of the socialist State, or contrary to the decision of the Cuban people to build socialism and communism. Violations of this principle can be punished by law.” It ´ s actually another limitation of the citizens ´ sovereignty; most importantly, it shows the illiberal condition of both the constitution and the state mechanisms for promoting democracy. The order of precedence starts with the State; then the people is defined, and nothing can be done by the citizens, who in fact should exercise their sovereignty in the variety of legal and political acts.
What does Article 137 say?“ This Constitution can only be modified by the National Assembly of People’ s Power, by means of resolutions adopted by roll-call vote by a majority of no less than two-thirds of the total number of members; except [ where the modification ] regards the political, social and economic system, whose irrevocable character is established in Article 3 of Chapter I, and the prohibition against negotiations under aggression, threats or coercion by a foreign power as established in Article 11. If the modification has to do with the integration and authority of the National Assembly of the People’ s Power or its Council of State or involves any rights and duties contained in the Constitution, it shall also require the approval of the majority of citizens with the right to vote by means of a referendum called upon for this purpose by the Assembly itself.” Reforming this article is crucial for any constitutional reform. A technical analysis should be done— from the perspectives of the jurisprudence, the sources of sovereignty, and the comparative law— in order to move forward with crucial reforms that return sovereignty to their legitimate sources and allow to recover or to reinvent the modern and democratic nature of the State. The first argument is that this article completely denies the foundation and the way to exercise sovereignty under Article 3. The latter says that sovereignty resides in the people, but it has no constitutional power to reform the constitution, although it is actually its sovereign and holder. Such denial is more evident while the mentioned article clearly states that the State power " is exercised directly or through the Assemblies of the People ' s Power." The added emphasis has not attracted much attention, neither from the propaganda cadres of the regime nor from the critics of the constitution.
152