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

RED VZLA Urgent Request to the OTP-3

REDACTED Page 59 of 190 The mobilization and deployment of the national security forces by the President in the context of the Homeland security plan and subsequently to quell protests and the mobilization of pro government armed paramilitary groups by the President himself, illustrate the clear policy of the state to use physical repression against the perceived dissident as a main strategy of addressing the demonstrations to demand GoV reforms. The establishment and implementation of the autonomous political structure of the Office of the President which is immune from accountability and the unequivocal de jure authority of the President over the military hierarchy coupled with the temporally and geographically coordinated offensives in several locations and on repeated instances with the pro government armed paramilitaries demonstrate the state policy in the implementation of the attack against the demonstrators including in the involvement of the pro government armed paramilitaries which responded to the President’s call to deploy and attack protestors. It is also a prima facie indication that the GoV colluded with the pro government armed paramilitaries in order to execute the crimes in a methodical manner. The discriminatory measures implemented by the GoV against the perceived dissidents in the form of violent threats, physical abuse, excessive use of force and indiscriminate attacks against the demonstrators, arbitrary arrests, illegal detentions, violation of right to due process, access to legal advice, the right to inform the families upon arrest, to being notified of the charges against them, the torture and other degrading and inhumane treatment imposed on them as well as the false and malicious prosecution campaign are indications that the state policy was designed at the highest echelons of the state in order to retain power by all means. e)Widespread and systematic nature of the attack Only the attack, and not the alleged individual acts are required to be “widespread” or “systematic”. In this regard, the adjective “widespread” refers to “the large-scale nature of the attack and the number of targeted persons”, while the adjective “systematic” refers to the “organised nature of the acts of violence and the improbability of their random occurrence”. The existence of a State or organisational policy is an element from which the systematic nature of an attack may be inferred. The consequences of the attack upon the targeted population, the number of victims, the nature of the acts, the possible participation of officials or authorities or any identifiable patterns of crimes, could be taken into account to determine whether the attack satisfies either or both requirements of a 'widespread' or 'systematic' attack." Based on the available information, there is a reasonable basis to believe that the attacks directed against the civilian population in the Venezuela were both widespread and systematic.

Pages Overview