The latest news about the International Criminal Court (ICC) affecting Venezuela and Venezuelans comes from two corners of the world that, although distant, are not unfamiliar with the country’s situation. On the one hand, the ICC successfully arrested Rodrigo Duterte, former president of the Philippines, and on the other, it received a visit from Chilean authorities to discuss the murder of Venezuelan Lieutenant Ronald Ojeda. Let’s examine both episodes and their connection to Venezuela.
On March 28, Rodrigo Duterte turned 80 and spent his birthday in the ICC’s Scheveningen prison. His arraignment is expected to take place on September 23. Duterte is accused of murder and of turning a supposed anti-drug operation into a government-run massacre operation that claimed the lives of more than 6,000 Filipinos. Duterte called himself “the punisher” and had already advanced his extermination policies when he was mayor of Davao between 2013 and 2016. Upon taking office, he leveraged his rhetoric on narratives such as ending crime, corruption, and illegal drug trafficking, and even brought back the death penalty. However, what marked his term as president between 2016 and 2022 were the extermination groups he authorized to carry out his policy of mass murders, for which the ICC opened an investigation and issued an arrest warrant in his case.
There are several relevant elements for the Venezuelan case. The first is that both countries began the preliminary examination phase on the exact same day, when Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda announced on February 8, 2018, that the situations in both the Philippines and Venezuela had merits to be evaluated by the Court’s authorities. From then on, both countries took two different paths.
Venezuela has played at fictitiously cooperating with the Court, seeking visits with the Prosecutor’s Office, showing that the State can cooperate with them, and even allowing the opening of an Office of the Prosecutor of the Court in Caracas, but ignoring the existence of crimes against humanity in Venezuela, as stated in every statement from the Foreign Ministry.
This apparent cooperation has served to access information, mitigate criticism, and delay proceedings. Thus, Venezuela has attempted to use international mechanisms to tame the pace and demands of protection mandates. It even filed six appeals before the ICC, all of which were lost by March 2024. Thus, the investigation into the country continues.
Something else happened in the Philippines. Duterte withdrew the Philippines from the ICC. He denounced the mechanism and did not cooperate in any way with the Court. However, the ICC’s mandate is clear: the crimes investigated in the Philippines occurred while the country was a member, so even its withdrawal could not end the ongoing process. So, the Prosecutor’s Office, led by Karim Khan since February 2021, continued the work left by Bensouda and achieved what no one expected. It turns out that power has changed hands in the Philippines. After the 2022 elections, the new president is Ferdinand Marcos Jr., son of the dictator who ruled the country from 1965 to 1986. Marcos Jr. came to power democratically. But the presidential election also includes direct voting for the vice presidency, separately but simultaneously. Sara Duterte, Duterte’s eldest daughter, won the office. Thus, both families came to power and remained in power until differences erupted, and the Marco Jr. administration initiated a series of interpellations against Vice President Sara Duterte in parliament. After much rumor and unrest since last year, on one of Duterte’s father-daughter trips to Hong Kong, upon returning to the Philippines, Interpol officers received an order from the ICC and the Philippine government to arrest Duterte, and so it happened. The next day, he was already in a cell at The Hague.
All of this occurred without the Philippines formally becoming a State Party to the ICC. However, the new government decided to cooperate and execute the arrest warrant. Thus, Rodrigo Duterte becomes the first former president to be tried by the Court. All the others were officials of other ranks or members of armed groups. This demonstrates that the ICC Prosecutor’s Office, which includes not only Prosecutor Khan but also some 200 people, can work independently on different cases.
On the other hand, we have Chile. There, security and intelligence agencies were surprised by a case of transnational repression. Lieutenant Ronald Ojeda, a Venezuelan who had refugee status in Chile, was kidnapped from his home by individuals disguised as Chilean officers on February 21, 2024. He was then disappeared, tortured, murdered, and clandestinely buried in a Santiago neighborhood. His remains were found by Chilean officials days later. In the year of investigation, Chilean authorities have stated that their investigation has demonstrated several things: that it was a joint action between a criminal gang and Venezuelan security officials, that the operation was organized in the Venezuelan embassy in Chile, and that the perpetrators received orders from the highest Venezuelan authorities.
Chile has a mandate to investigate this crime, which occurred on its territory, and to find those responsible, even though it is a network with members inside and outside Chile. For this reason, it was extraordinary news that the Chilean government announced the cooperation of that country’s Prosecutor’s Office with the ICC Prosecutor’s Office. This isn’t about diverting the Ojeda case, but rather enriching both investigations. In the Venezuela I case before the ICC, homicides aren’t being investigated (as was the case with the Philippines), but rather arbitrary detentions, forced disappearances, torture, sexual violence, and persecution. If both systems investigate how political persecution works in Venezuela, it’s clear that there is data from Chile that may be of interest to The Hague, especially if the chain of command has common elements.
Chile’s cooperation with the ICC is novel for the system and demonstrates the gravity of the crimes against humanity committed in Venezuela, because they have escalated to the point of spilling over and crossing borders. But at the same time, Venezuelan victims gain another ally because another ICC State Party is providing materials for the investigation.
This form of cooperation, which could be followed by other countries where there are victims, perpetrators, or, especially, witnesses of the Venezuelan repressive apparatus, could provide momentum and further clues for Prosecutor Khan to open a specific case that will soon lead to arrest warrants or appearances before the court. Different criminal justice systems have their own pace and methods for meeting their standards of proof in investigations, but there is evidence that all have made progress and that Venezuelan victims may be closer to truth and justice. When systems cooperate, victims are no longer alone.