March 1^st., 2010

The ICHR report on Venezuela

The Report Democracy and Human Rights in Venezuela, published by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (ICHR), is an historical document due to its origin and objectivity, as asserted by the leaders of the NGO dealing with the issue. It states that for the sake of attaining economic, social and cultural rights in Venezuela, the validity of other fundamental rights cannot be sacrificed. ¨Human rights are indissoluble as a whole and as signaled in the American Convention in its preamble, the ideal free human being, exempt from fear and misery, can be achieved only if conditions are created allowing each person to enjoy its economic, social and cultural civil and political rights.¨  The ICHR affirms that by getting ahead of the international propaganda fed by petrodollars, in regard to a supposedly social policy to benefit the poor, the government cannot undermine or leave out the promotion of guaranties such as the right to live, to equality and freedom of speech. The Report also denounces violations against the right to live by executions carried out by the police and the increase in lack of security: to freedom of speech by closing RCTVI, the feints to carry out the same regarding Globovisión, the revocation of transmission permits to 30 radio stations and the menace against another 200; trials and imprisonment of journalists; aggressions against communicators and governmental harassment to independent newspapers.  The ICHR addresses a special chapter to the judicial system totally controlled by the officialdom, and in general terms, the precariousness of the constitutional state The Report points out as extremely serious, the impunity in regard to violations of human rights. The victims resort uselessly to the courts that do not act on the matter or find the complaints without motif.

This is the second report that the ICHR dedicates to Venezuela the last 10 years. The first was published in 2003 after a visit in loco by the organism to the country in 2002. The most forceful argument on the veracity of the vision that the ICHR has on what takes place in the country is the denial to a new in loco visit which would allow the government to refute or explain whatever it deems pertinent. Chavez denies the permit for a new visit arguing that it is an organism controlled by the US. He qualified the second report as ignominious, questioning the moral value of the Commission. ¨It is not worthwhile to answer to those people. It is garbage from the empire, to isolate and destabilize my government.¨ About Santiago Canton, Executive Secretary of the ICHR, he said ¨he is pure excrement¨, what we should do – he said – is denounce the treaty by which Venezuela was ascribed to said Commission and get out of the OAS. The Washington Post criticized the silence of neighboring countries on the contents of the report as well as Insulza’s declaration taking distance because of his aspiration to the support of Chavez to continue as Secretary General.

EMBLEMATIC CASES

The universities and the students occupy the front row of those considered by Chavez as enemies of the process. The students continue to protest even though violently assaulted by ¨Chavista¨ (pro Chavez) gangs, detained by the police and brought to justice under laws recently enacted which charge protests. The Universidad Central is the main object of Chavez’s hatred since in good measure it symbolizes all of them. The university campus is the object of all types of violence culminating in an attempt against the Rector, Cecilia Garcia Arocha. A group of people wearing hoods fired 17 shots to the windows of the Rectorate; Garcia Arocha saved her life since she was not in her office. She gave a press conference together with the authorities and Faculty Deans, to announce they would go before the UNESCO to denounce the aggressions against the symbols and spaces of the University City declared as Cultural Heritage of Humanity. ¨The measure is due to the defenseless state in which the ¨ucevista¨ (Universidad Central community) community lives under the indifference of the authorities to establish responsibilities in regard to the aggressions and damages caused to the University.¨ The Rector exposed the attempt before the Attorney’s Office which evidenced the damages caused by the gunfire but did not take effective measures to determine the authorship alleging that the Rector did not identify the perpetrators of such savagery. 

Another case which made the front page of newspapers on violation of human rights, was the claim filed by Cuban doctors who affirm having being submitted to slavery in Venezuela. They argue that they came to work at Barrio Adentro as ¨modern slaves¨. They were able to get out of the country and take refuge in Miami where they filed the claim before a Federal Court, stating that the Cuban-Venezuelan agreement placed them in a condition of ¨servitude for debt¨. Their services were paid by PDVSA to the Cuban government. Trustworthy analysts estimated the payment to be $3,000 for each ¨slave in white coat¨ while the same only received in Venezuela $300, being forced to become political promoters. They say that they lived in cramped rented quarters or in houses belonging to persons sympathetic to the regime (Chavismo) and that they were working without a license to practice medicine in Venezuela. They assured that they were impeded to establish relationships with persons considered ¨problematic¨ due to their political position and in case they did, were returned to Cuba or transferred to inhospitable zones. The assisting lawyer stressed that the ¨agreement between the governments of Cuba and Venezuela in regard to the doctors constitutes a flagrant conspiracy comparable to the commerce of slaves in colonial America.¨ The plaintiffs demand restitution for damages and losses suffered, and according to their attorney who alleges jurisprudence on indemnification to Cubans sent to work under inhuman and degrading conditions, once the Court decides to admit the claim, PDVSA´s assets might be frozen by virtue of the work relationship with the company that paid their salaries. 

Teodoro Petkoff commenting on the death in Cuba of Orlando Zapata, the political prisoner in hunger strike, asked himself, what happens to Franklin Brito?  A farmer who went on a hunger strike in order to regain the property of a small farm, he was abducted, forcibly driven to the Military Hospital where he was injected with drugs and submitted to a psychiatric treatment. He is being retained and considered insane because during the hunger strike he nearly died.

                      CHAVEZ´ CONFLICT WITH COLOMBIA

The relationship between Colombia and Venezuela after Uribe leaves office is an issue dealt with by analysts of both countries. They coincide that it will continue to be tense since for Bogotá and Caracas the reason of the conflict is very clear. Colombia is convinced that Chavez is the most important collaborator of the guerrilla and Chavez will invariably continue with the project of expanding the Bolivarian revolution into the neighboring country. The last confrontation between the two leaders was generated at the Unasur meeting in Cancun. Credible sources confirmed that a heated discussion developed between both leaders when Uribe compared the embargo by the US to Cuba with Venezuela’s treatment of Colombian companies. According to Colombian sources Uribe made a comment to which Chavez shouted ¨go to hell¨, Uribe reacted outraged and said ¨Be a man, the international commercial problems have to be discussed at these forums, you are courageous when speaking from a distance and a coward face-to-face.¨ A group was created in Cancun to mediate between both countries and both leaders have stated that they are willing to get over the effects of the altercation. Mutual interests: Venezuela needs to buy energy and Colombia to improve its exports. Beyond the pragmatic relationships, the present discrepancy is that according to Chavez, the US is preparing an invasion from Colombian bases to overthrow him and hold back the revolution, and according to Uribe, the agreement giving access to seven Colombian bases to US military is a valuable cooperation in its combat against drug traffic and terrorism. Uribe’s exit from the Palace of Nariño will not put an end to the crisis.

During the last months Colombians have been murdered in Venezuelan territory, accusation of espionage, detention of security officers of both countries, destruction of handmade bridges at the border of both countries, fly over by Venezuelan military planes above the border city of Arauca, among others. According to El Espectador from Bogotá, Colombian military forces are identifying targets from a possible Venezuelan attack to Colombia after Chavez declared that ¨the country must prepare for war.¨ The same newspaper attributes to military sources the affirmation that ¨our troops are in combat year round and are prepared to resist.¨  The Colombian Minister of Defense asked the Venezuelan authorities to capture and deliver guerrilla combatants within the country, after assuring that near fifteen FARC leaders are operating from the border. Caracas responded that these were ¨unwarranted comments without proof.¨. According to Chavez, Silva is ¨mentally retarded.¨ Spanish press informs that a legal action was initiated against members of ETA and FARC for planning to assassinate Uribe and that the Venezuelan government was involved.

Uribe’s possible successors, except Gustavo Petro, Chavez’s admirer, will continue its policy. Juan Manuel Santos, who has great possibilities, has been very clear in pointing out the peril that Chavez represents for his country. He warned that maintaining the conflict with Colombia is his strategy to guarantee the support from the military that do not seriously consider a supposed American invasion but do grant some credibility to its belligerent speech with respect to Colombia. As Defense Minister, he activated the displacement of military troops and equipment to the border, often arguing with Chavez.