April 8, 2015
Buenos Aires
Ambassador Noah Mamet
Embassy of the United States
Av. Colombia 4300
Buenos Aires
Esteemed Ambassador Mamet:
I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the letter dated February 25, 2015, and signed by Mr.
Kenneth Roy, the Political Counselor at the Embassy of the United States in Buenos Aires, in which
I was invited to share my thoughts about the upcoming VII Summit of the Americas, which will be
held in Panama City on April 10-11, 2015.1
Here at the Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS), an organization that has worked for the
defense and protection of human rights since 1979, we are convinced that the success of the
Summit, as a multilateral space, depends largely on the respect for democratic principles and
international law shown by the States involved. In this sense, we feel obligated to convey our
concern about the recent sanctions imposed unilaterally by the United States government (U.S.)
against officials in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (Venezuela).2
This type of measure only contributes to delegitimizing and weakening the multilateral mechanisms
created by the international community with the aim of promoting political frameworks for
guaranteeing stability and democracy. In contrast, country efforts should be focused on bolstering
the role and impact of these spaces. The current loss of prestige suffered by the Organization of
American States (OAS) reflects the urgent need to reinforce its tools to collectively address matters
and thereby avert isolated actions on the part of its member States.
The United States’ unilateral sanctions against Venezuelan officials, originating from public law 113278 from December 2014 and Executive Order 13692 from March 2015,3 are inherently arbitrary
and selective and should be repealed as a result.
1See:
http://www.summit-americas.org/seventhsummit.htm
See: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/03/09/executive-order-blocking-property-and-suspending-entry-certainpersons-c
3
See:
“Executive
Order
13692
of
March
8,
2015,”
available
at:
http://www.treasury.gov/resourcecenter/sanctions/Programs/Documents/venezuela_eo.pdf
2
In fact, the reasons put forth to justify these measures only serve to ratify their arbitrary nature.
Public law 113-278, entitled the “Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act of
2014,” is based on numerous reflections, including economic arguments regarding the high inflation
rate, the imposition of currency controls, and the scarcity of basic goods. Beyond the political and
ideological differences that exist regarding the economy, and the successes and failures that all
governments face upon taking economic measures, countries have the independence and
sovereignty to choose, implement and develop their own economic policies. Under no circumstance
can these arguments be accepted as the basis for applying sanctions.
In addition, both the law and the Executive Order mention the occurrence of human rights
violations to justify their adoption and implementation. The Executive Order specifically cites the
“use of violence and human rights violations and abuses in response to antigovernment protests, and arbitrary arrest
and detention of antigovernment protestors.” On March 16, 2015, CELS participated in a public hearing on
human rights in the context of protests at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
(IACHR), which was solicited jointly by organizations from various countries in the region,
including Argentina, the U.S. and Venezuela.4 At the event, panelists spoke of violations that have
taken place and continue to take place both in Caracas and in Ferguson, Missouri,5 which must be
investigated and sanctioned while at the same time policies are designed and implemented to ensure
that these abuses are not repeated.6
This hearing underscored the unfortunate fact that numerous countries in the region, including the
U.S., employ the “use of violence and human rights violations and abuses in response to…protests” and the
“arbitrary arrest and detention of…protestors.” In this context, such justifications have no legitimacy and
cannot be used to uphold unilateral sanctions by one State against another—which can only be
understood as selective and arbitrary and which have shown themselves to be ineffective throughout
history in terms of protecting the rights of affected persons.
The international human rights protection system has mechanisms and bodies that pertain to
multilateral organizations, such as the United Nations (UN) and the OAS. They are charged with
See (in Spanish and English): http://www.cels.org.ar/comunicacion/?info=detalleDoc&ids=4&lang=es&ss=46&idc=1913
See: https://youtu.be/_NF0K33bkLI
6 See CELS’ press releases: “Grave represión de la protesta social en Venezuela,” available in Spanish and English at:
http://cels.org.ar/comunicacion/?info=detalleDoc&ids=4&lang=es&ss=46&idc=1905 and “El CELS y la represión de la protesta social en
Venezuela,” available in Spanish at: http://cels.org.ar/comunicacion/?info=detalleDoc&ids=4&lang=es&ss=46&idc=1907; and an
article by PROVEA “Venezuela y EEUU hermanados… en la represión,” available in Spanish at:
http://www.derechos.org.ve/2015/03/23/rafael-uzcategui-venezuela-y-eeuu-hermanados-en-la-represion/
4
5
monitoring and making observations, recommendations and even legally binding decisions regarding
the human rights situation in countries that have accepted their jurisdiction. Instead of pursuing
unilateral measures, States should above all take action to try to strengthen the tools and broaden the
scope of these mechanisms.
Furthermore, the Executive Order attempts to argue that matters exclusively related to Venezuela’s
domestic reality constitute, in its words, “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security” of the
U.S. In addition to its fallacious reasoning, this phrasing revives the logic of the National Security
Doctrine that served in past decades as the framework for authoritarian regimes and grave human
rights violations. Unfortunately, ruptures of democracy have not been banished from the region, a
fact illustrated by the cases of Venezuela (2002), Honduras (2009) and Paraguay (2012).
Both the law and the Executive Order flout basic principles of legal due process upon granting the
U.S. President and the Treasury Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the power to
apply sanctions to any person in Venezuela who, according to their sole criteria, is understood to be
responsible for actions such as eroding democratic processes and institutions and limiting or
penalizing the exercise of freedom of expression and of assembly. This degree of discretion violates
essential pillars of the rule of law, such as the presumption of innocence and the right to a defense.
In conclusion, there is a pressing need for these norms to be repealed. Other actions must be taken
to effectively address human rights violations. As a first step in this direction, we urge Venezuela to
reverse its decision to denounce the American Convention on Human Rights while also urging the
U.S. to ratify it.
Work must also be done to strengthen the role of intergovernmental organizations, including the
OAS, in Venezuela’s next parliamentary elections so that they can be carried out peacefully,
democratically and with respect for the constitutional order and the rule of law.
I look forward to receiving a response from you and take this opportunity to send along my best
regards.
Gastón Chillier, executive director
Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS)