Talk:Constitution of Cuba
Who did this translation ? -- Beardo
Yes, and I think it would be great if a reader who is very fluent in both Spanish and English would comment, here in the talk page, on the translation. Does it have any areas of questionable fidelity to the probable intent of the original? email@example.com 19:44, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I am not sure that my Spanish is up to that - but using Cubanet as a source strikes me as somewhat risky. -- Beardo 09:20, 26 May 2008
I'm reasonably good at English; my Spanish is much worse, but I read texts of this kind moderately well. Therefore, when I needed the text, I checked parts of both the Spanish version (es:) and of this English version. Where I checked both parts at points in the main part of the document, I found no or small differences in meaning (but I didn't systematically look for any, either). However, I found some rather large omissions at the beginning and the end; and Article 137 has rather different meaning in the two versions. The reason, I think, is the text actually indicated both at the end of the last article (137) and in the given source notice in the English version. (Unhappily, the link to the source is stale.) Both indicate that this is the 1992 version, without the changes from 2002.
In particular, the "special disposition" added at the very end of the constitution in 2002 is completely missing.
The only indication I found that the English text would have been influenced at all from the year 2002 changes is the sentence immediately before the preamble, namelt "Amended: ?, 2002." However, this and the few lines with years and in some cases dates of chances is just a very short summary of a lengthy "nota" before the preamble in the Spanish text, containing some notes about when and how the constitution was adopted and amended. They are not just factual, but contain some longer evaluationary comments. In particular, the adoption of the suggested amendments in 2002 are said to have been supported by a referendum and a manifestation "without precedence" of different parts of the nation, against the demandr by the President of the United States. Also the "special disposition" and the new formulation of Article 137 alludes to the inviolability of the constitutional rules about the social, economic and political character of Cuba, and of its people's strive for Socialism and Communism.
(Actually, the changes in 2002 could be considered as the official Cuban answer to the tries by parts of the opposition to introduce a bill for constitutional reform by means of Article 88 g). However, this is not relevant here.)
Conclusion: I do not think that this text should be deleted (if it isn't established as a copyvio), but it probably should be moved to Constitution of Cuba (1992). If this Spanish text can be found of the 1992 constitution, in an authoritative version, somewhere, then, as "user firstname.lastname@example.org" suggested six years ago, someone more competent in both Spanish and English should compare these texts (and in particular translate th"Nota" properly, if there was one in that version). In addition, optimally, there should be some effort to make a translation also of the amended constitution from 2002 (based on this translated, or started from scratch).JoergenB (talk) 20:08, 13 August 2014 (UTC)