Nicolas Maduro hides the result of the presidential election, but he does not hide the unbridled use of repression against Venezuelan society and his political adversaries.
On July 28, Venezuela held a presidential election in which numerous candidates participated, of which only two had, according to polls conducted in the previous months, a chance of winning. The National Electoral Council (CNE) of Venezuela, like every electoral body in the world, in each contest offers the electoral results indicating each Voting Center, as well as each voting table throughout the country. This has occurred for decades, not always with the urgency that is required, but usually within a matter of hours the CNE presents the results clearly.
This has not been the case this time. Neither the country, nor the electoral observation organizations that witnessed the event, nor the international community have seen the results of the election, and without this being an obstacle, the CNE, led by Elvis Amoroso, one of the most conspicuous defenders of the Nicolás Maduro regime, presented a final figure that gives him as the winner, despite the fact that the voting receipts that the CNE itself gave to each campaign command show a resounding defeat for the candidate/president.
Faced with the demand of Venezuelan society that the CNE present the broken down figures of results, the response of the Maduro regime has been to take repression and the violation of human rights to levels of the greatest gravity, and this has been corroborated by the report presented on September 17, 2024 by the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to the United Nations Human Rights Council, which since 2019 has been closely monitoring the human rights situation in the country. This report describes the facts relating to deaths in the context of protests, arbitrary arrests, short-term enforced disappearances, torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, sexual and gender-based violence.
To understand the magnitude of this escalation, let us look at some of the findings of the report, but not before highlighting that it took place in the midst of a situation of such conflict and fear that many victims were not willing to offer their testimonies due to the widespread reprisals against anyone who contradicted official positions. Let us begin with a reference to the events of July 29 and 30: “…During those days, and in the days that followed, there was violent repression by security forces and groups of armed civilians allied with the government. The authorities launched the “tun tun” operation to detain in their homes people who had participated in the protests or who had expressed critical opinions against the government. This generated a climate of widespread terror in the population…”
Coinciding with this violent onslaught, the main spokesmen of the ruling party, and in particular the recently appointed Minister of the Interior and Justice, began to describe the government, which they previously defined as a “civil-military alliance”, to now describe it as a “civil-military and police alliance”.
Regarding the deaths that occurred during the post-election protests, the report states: “…On August 12, 2024, the Attorney General acknowledged the death of 25 people in the protests of July 29 and 30, without identifying all of the deceased. The Attorney General attributed all of the deaths “to the criminal groups instrumentalized by the so-called ‘comanditos’ [local groups of supporters of the Democratic Unity Roundtable]”. He also declared that he had no information on any case of excessive use of force by the security forces.”
The report states that “…the mission documented the presence of armed civilians shooting and interacting with security forces or acting alone in several protests. In several of the cases investigated, there was the presence of members of the Bolivarian National Guard or officials of the Bolivarian National Police, who used their firearms to repress the protesters…”
It should be noted that the use of armed civilians in the role of a paramilitary force to intimidate and confront the opposition has been a constant in the Venezuelan case, and these groups often act in the face of the deliberate inaction of the military forces or, in many cases, jointly with them.
Regarding arbitrary arrests in the same period, the report states: “…Of the arrests that occurred before the elections, the mission has reasonable grounds to believe that the authorities carried out at least 39 arbitrary arrests (32 men and 7 women) of persons who were opponents or perceived as such…”
Furthermore, arrests of persons for participating in campaign events for candidate Edmundo González, and even of persons who were hired to provide services to the campaign, have also been recurrent: “…Among those arrested were numerous members or sympathizers of Vente Venezuela and other opposition parties. Owners, family members or employees of companies were also arrested simply for providing accommodation, food, transportation and technical production services for opposition electoral events…”
Cases of torture are also recorded in the report: “…The methods of torture used in the cases investigated included punches; beatings with wooden planks or bats wrapped in foam, and electric shocks, including to the genitals. Other recorded methods included suffocation with plastic bags, immersion in cold water, and sleep deprivation through 24-hour loud lighting and/or music. These methods are consistent with torture methods used by the Bolivarian National Police and intelligence services documented in previous mission reports…”
“Taking into account both the patterns of action and state policy outlined in previous reports, as well as the profile of the victims and public statements by senior state officials, the mission has reasonable grounds to believe that the crime of politically motivated persecution has been committed during the period covered by its mandate,” the report concluded.
In this same sense, the report highlights and reaffirms the clear existence of crimes against humanity that require the action of bodies such as the International Criminal Court: “…Although this is a continuation of previous patterns that the mission has already characterized as crimes against humanity, the recent repression, due to its intensity and systematic nature, represents a very serious attack on the fundamental rights of the Venezuelan people, committed despite multiple calls inside and outside the country to respect human rights.”
This pattern of widespread violations constitutes a very serious limitation of civic space, and the denial of basic democratic values. In the same period, the media and journalists are harassed, the use of social networks is questioned, and the authorities detain citizens to “review” the content of their electronic devices and, if critical messages are found, arrests or threatening blackmails are carried out in order to obtain money from people.
In this way, the response of the regime headed by Nicolás Maduro to the demand for the presentation of the electoral results is taking place in the field of the most ruthless repression. However, these actions, according to the Mission, entail international responsibility. Thus, the report makes the following recommendation: “…The mission recommends that the international community continue to actively monitor the human rights situation in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. In particular, it should insist on the need for accountability in cases of serious human rights violations and international crimes, as well as justice and reparation for the victims. The mission reiterates the importance of supporting genuine efforts at national accountability, including those carried out on the basis of the principle of universal jurisdiction, as well as the investigation of the International Criminal Court…”
Therefore, our call to the international community is the same: the situation in Venezuela constitutes a flagrant violation of Human Rights, and only respect for the popular will expressed in the votes of July 28 opens the way to the establishment of a regime of freedoms, respect for human rights and the establishment of essential democratic values such as the separation of powers.