Please activate JavaScript!
Please install Adobe Flash Player, click here for download

RED VZLA Urgent Request to the OTP-3

REDACTED Page 18 of 190 c) severe abuse of process against detainees; d) acts amounting to torture and other inhumane acts; e) violation to the rights of the defendant including by being denied access to legal advice, prevented from notifying their families, being denied information on the charges until their appearance in court, denied the time to prepare their defence, denied the right to equality of arms; f) false and malicious charges being brought against the detainees ; g) cases with little to no evidence of the charges; and h) clear bias or lack of independence of the judges. Despite the fact that these arrests were made pursuant to a GoV policy, these arrests and detentions of civilians perceived as dissidents made as a result of this GoV policy were unlawful in light of the fact that they were not made on the basis of legislations lawfully adopted and implemented in accordance with the Venezuelan Constitution and they were made with the main aim of targeting groups of civilians and persecuting them on the basis of political grounds. In many cases, those arbitrarily arrested were charged with offences despite not having being caught committing any crime. Many were charged with criminal conspiracy (asociación para delinquir), under the Organized Crime and Terrorism Funding of Terrorism Act (Ley Orgánica contra la Delincuencia Organizada y Financiamiento al Terrorismo), which establishes prison sentences of six to ten years. In order to sustain his plan to arrest all the perceived dissidents, whether they committed crimes or not, Maduro also implemented a policy, acting together with the General Prosecutor and members of the judiciary under his de facto control due to their loyalty to the PSUV, to subject the fascists to false, malicious and abusive prosecutions. Many civilians perceived as dissidents were arrested pursuant to charges, without foundation which are deliberately fabricated by the General Prosecutor and Prosecutors under the PSUV control. Indications that the judiciary has participated in the cover up of the abuse of process is that none of the charges were dismissed despite the blatant and grave abuses committed by the Police and the General Prosecutor’s office. Some charges were allowed to stand despite being brought based almost exclusively on police reports and, in several instances, on what was plausibly denounced by detainees as planted evidence. The judges allowed cases to proceed and to be determined applying unjustifiably low thresholds of standard of proof to the Prosecution’s evidence due to bias towards the GoV and relying exclusively on police reports despite allegations of abuse of process. Convictions and judicial decisions were based on minimalistic evidence such as a piece of barbed wire in some cases. Evidence in particular email correspondences presented

Pages Overview