OAS Appoints Former ICC Prosecutor Ocampo to Look Into Venezuela ‘Crimes Against Humanity’

Luis Moreno Ocampo (L) discusses human rights with NYT columnist Nicholas Kristof (R) at the CFR Symposium on International Law and Justice sponsored by the Pitt-Jolie Foundation*
teleSUR | July 25, 2017
Luis Almagro, the secretary-general of the Organization of American States, has appointed former International Criminal Court Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo as OAS special adviser on crimes against humanity.
Ocampo, who also served as a World Bank consultant, is a controversial figure who has been described as erratic and prone to grandstanding performances that undercut his own legal efforts.
According to a statement published by the OAS, Ocampo’s tasks will include analyzing, studying and discussing the situation in Venezuela with all interested parties and, consequently, making suggestions on possible courses of action by the OAS.
Almagro said the decision was made in light of an “escalation of human rights violations in Venezuela and the systematic attack on the civilian population includes murder, imprisonment and torture … it is evident in the eyes of the international community that we are witnessing crimes against humanity. ”
Caracas has repeatedly accused Almagro and the OAS of promoting intervention and destabilization in Venezuela, which ultimately led to the Bolivarian nation leaving the regional body on the grounds that its continued presence there posed a threat to the country’s sovereignty.
“The OAS can prevent impunity in Venezuela,” Ocampo said. “The secretary-general is creating a new space within the OAS, focusing on crime prevention and control, as well as gathering information that may be useful to the OAS in conducting an independent judicial investigation”
Luis Moreno Ocampo earned much of his recognition during his time as deputy prosecutor during the case of nine members of the military junta that ruled Argentina from 1976 to 1983. However, his time as ICC prosecutor is largely seen as a failure in which the global court lost a great deal of its credibility as some impartial body, largely thanks to Ocampo’s wild moves and desire to seek the media spotlight.
Ocampo drew criticism for his role in Colombia, where in 2008 he suggested that the ICC should begin investigating the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia or FARC for crimes against humanity. At the time, then-President Alvaro Uribe was busy pursuing a bloody counterinsurgency campaign against the group, utilizing paramilitary death squads and security forces whose operations led to the execution of 2,364 civilians, a figure that dwarfed the death toll resulting from FARC actions during Uribe’s reign.
In recent years, Ocampo also drew negative attention for his proceedings against sitting heads of state, a pattern that also began in 2008 when he sought a warrant for the arrest of Sudanese President Omar Bashir amid the raging conflict in Darfur. Critics claim that the evidence cited by Ocampo was a spurious mix of fact and fiction, and such an intervention while the civil war raged would only stymie the possibility of an internationally-mediated peace process.
“My time in the ICC was a mixture of a fascinating time and a terrible time,” a former staffer for the Office of the Prosecutor said at the time, according to World Affairs Journal. “The prosecutor was erratic, so irrational sometimes that you felt despair. He uses his charisma in a negative way.
Since then, Ocampo has pursued the prosecution of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad on charges of genocide while likewise charging deceased former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi with crimes against humanity for alleged massacres committed against anti-government protests that became increasingly violent before culminating in an open “regime change” campaign spearheaded by the U.S. with European and Gulf Arab allies.
The court has largely been discredited among non-Group of 7 nations as a neocolonial tool of Western capitals seeking to control the Global south. Last October, Gambia’s Information Minister Sheriff Bojang noted that the ICC is, “in fact, an International Caucasian Court for the persecution and humiliation of people of color.”
Most recently, the former ICC prosecutor advised the Israelis on how to evade criminal charges for their perpetual expansion of illegal settlements. Ocampo noted that the settler-colonial state could successfully defend itself by manipulating international legal perceptions through arguments that the ongoing settlement construction is legal “once ratified by the country’s top court,” the Israeli High Court, which Ocampo argued “is highly respected internationally.”
* Photo: YouTube-Council on Foreign Relations
The Guardian’s Propaganda on Venezuela
By Ricardo Vaz | Investig’Action | July 25, 2017
With the Constituent Assembly elections due to take place on July 30th, the Guardian published a piece titled “Venezuela elections: all you need to know”. But instead of breaking through the fog of falsehood and misinformation that is typical of the mainstream media’s coverage of Venezuela, the Guardian comes up with another propaganda piece laden with lies, distortions and omissions. In this article we go through the Guardian’s piece, clarifying the falsehoods, adding the conveniently omitted information and questioning the whole narrative that is presented.
*****
What is happening on 30 July?
To be fair to the Guardian, there is one almost-informative paragraph, where the electoral procedure is explained. In a previous article the Guardian stated that
“[…] election rules appear designed to guarantee a majority for the government even though it has minority popular support”,
instead of presenting said electoral rules and letting the reader decide if they are so designed. This time they do present the rules, only omitting to say that everyone not currently holding public office can run for a seat. But then the Guardian brings in the propaganda artillery to ensure the reader’s conclusions do not stray too far off from those of the State Department.
“[…] voter turnout will be exclusively pro-government – and likely very low, given that Maduro’s approval rating hovers around 20%” 1
One assumes the Guardian is citing Datanalisis, their favourite Venezuelan anti-government pollster. Putting aside the fact that other, more reliable polls, demonstrate larger levels of government support, and the massive turnout for last Sunday’s dry-run, there are two obvious questions here. If turnout will be so low, why is the opposition hell-bent on stopping the vote from taking place, barricading streets and killing candidates? And if the opposition has such an overwhelming majority, why did they decide not to participate? This might have been their chance to introduce a Platt Amendment into the Constitution.
“The current constitution was written by an assembly called in 1999 by Maduro’s predecessor and political father, Hugo Chávez. But Chavez made sure he had popular support for the rewrite, by calling a referendum first. This time around, Maduro ordered the constituent assembly by decree.”
Chávez needed to call a referendum because he was working within the legal framework of the 1961 Constitution which did not have anything about such a mechanism. In the 1999 Constitution, article 348 states who can convene a Constituent Assembly.
Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro has repeatedly urged opposition leaders to engage in dialogue and has backed the Constituent Assembly to guarantee peace.
“On 16 July, a symbolic plebiscite against Maduro’s initiative held by the opposition drew more than seven million people – more than those who voted for Maduro in the 2014 election.”
When it comes to the Venezuelan opposition, the Guardian checks all the journalism tools at the door. In a recent Investig’Action article we examined the opposition’s highly doubtful numbers, Venezuelanalysis did the same. At least the Guardian refrained from explicitly saying this vote could have recalled Maduro, something the opposition could not manage even with a lot of number-cooking (see footnote 2).
“Amid mounting pressure, Maduro vowed last month to hold a popular vote at the end of the process to approve or reject the new constitution.”
This was announced almost two months ago, and if it had been due to “mounting pressure” the mainstream media would have done a victory lap. Here another question springs up: why are the Venezuelan opposition and the Guardian so scared of this process? If they represent this huge majority, can they not just vote down the Constituent Assembly proposal?
Why did Maduro call this vote?
The final paragraph of this section contains the mandatory red-baiting and waving of the Cuban bogeyman.
“Venezuela has been rocked by nonstop street protests since the government’s attempt in late March to strip Congress of its right to legislate. Although the move was partially reversed, demonstrations have continued against an increasingly authoritarian government widely blamed for the country’s tanking economy and soaring crime rate.”
Again, there is very little journalism here to be found. It was not the government that overrode the National Assembly, but the Supreme Court. And they did it because the National Assembly is currently in contempt of court. Three legislators from Amazonas state are being investigated for electoral fraud, and despite repeated warnings from judicial authorities, the opposition went ahead and swore in these legislators. One can agree or disagree with the Supreme Court’s initiative, but omitting this fact is pure dishonesty.
This is also a good point to notice how only the “authoritarian” government and the “beleaguered” president have earned adjectives. “Protests” are referred to five times without a single reference to their violent nature, and a few adjectives (“divided”, “US-backed”, “coup-plotting”) also come to mind when describing the opposition.
“[…] violence and state repression have escalated since, with more than 100 people killed and hundreds arrested.”
Sophisticated newspapers like the Guardian are careful not to state directly that everyone was killed by state repression, only heavily implying it. A breakdown of the cases shows that it is the opposition’s political violence that has been responsible for the large majority of casualties.
What does the opposition say?
“The coalition of opposition forces known as the Democratic Unity Roundtable (known by its Spanish initials, MUD) rejected the move from the start. But criticism extends far beyond the political opposition. According to one pollster, eight out of 10 Venezuelans oppose a new constitution and would prefer general elections.”
One would think this would be an opportune moment to remind readers of the opposition’s constant, repeated calls for a Constituent Assembly in the recent past. And according to a different pollster, 79% of Venezuelans agree that the process should take place, 54% think the process will defend social gains of recent years, and 65% agrees with holding elections in 2018.
Opposition leaders Freddy Guevara and Maria Corina Machado had called for a Constituent Assembly in the past. (Tweets by Misión Verdad)
What happens next?
“Pressure is set to rise after the MUD called a two-day national strike for Wednesday and Thursday, and then mass protests dubbed the “taking of Caracas” on Friday.”
To anyone familiar with the recent history of Venezuela these announcements sound eerily like the events leading up to the failed 2002 coup. In fact, this would be the time to mention that many of the opposition leaders, including Henrique Capriles, Julio Borges, Leopoldo López and Maria Corina Machado, were directly involved in the 2002 coup attempt. Why is there never a mention that the opposition leadership is full of protagonists from that US-backed military coup that ultimately failed? Quite simply because it would undermine the entire “democracy vs. dictatorship” propaganda narrative.
“Maduro has been very vague about the scope of the new constitution – prompting fears that this is simply a move to tighten the government’s hold on power rather than to solve the country’s many problems.”
This is again a distortion. Maduro proposed nine issues to be tackled by the ANC, including the economy, national sovereignty, social missions, communes, and more. Granted, there is some ambiguity on what a “post-oil economy” stands for, with radical sectors looking for a deepening of the Revolution and business leaders looking for more incentives to private investment. But is down to the individual candidates to bring forward their proposals during the campaign. If Maduro specifically said what changes he wanted made to the Constitution, would he not fit into the “authoritarian” label that the Guardian loves to use?
“Maduro threatened to jail two high profile opposition leaders for “treason to the motherland”…”
Once more, it would be useful to put the actions of the Venezuelan opposition in context. There is hardly any other place in the world where opposition leaders openly call for a US military invasion or urge foreign agents to create a financial blockade against their own country!
“According to human rights groups…”
Which rights groups? Why not link to the reports and disclose who funds these groups? Because groups like Human Rights Watch have been beyond partisan when it comes to Venezuela, not to mention the revolving door that puts former US officials as human rights “guardians”. UNICEF, for example, has criticised the use of children in the opposition’s violent protests and the opposition’s attack against a maternity hospital.
“The next presidential elections – which Maduro seems likely to lose – are currently scheduled to be held in 2018, but it is unclear whether this would remain the case under a new constitution.”
Maduro has said that, rain or shine, there will be a presidential election in 2018. And he said it after convening the Constituent Assembly. The omission of this statement is again plain dishonest journalism.

Chavistas march on May 1st. The Venezuelan opposition is fearful of a large turnout for the Constituent Assembly elections on July 30th.
What is the international community doing?
“The Organization of American States has tried repeatedly to chastise Venezuela diplomatically, but Caracas has used oil diplomacy to ensure that small Caribbean states reliant on subsidised oil voted against critical resolutions or abstained.”
It is amazing that countries that are part of PetroCaribe are bullied by oil diplomacy, and yet countries that receive billions in US (military) aid and host US military bases are moved by a genuine love for democracy and human rights. Does it not occur to a journalist that, for a small Caribbean country, if a US-dominated organisation such as the OAS is dictating to Venezuela which elections can take place and when, then soon enough the same will happen to them? By rejecting this interference they are actually asserting their own independence.
It is precisely because this kind of bullying that Venezuela left the OAS. On the other hand, regional organisations that have been formed in the last decade precisely to counter US hegemony, like ALBA or CELAC, have come out in support of Venezuela and its sovereignty. International meetings like the People’s Summit or the Foro de São Paulo have also rejected the imperialist aggression against Venezuela.
“Previous US sanctions have targeted Venezuelan officials accused of drug trafficking or involvement in human rights abuses.”
These accusations have always been very big in terms of publicity and very thin in terms of evidence. They are always based on dubious sources mentioning all-powerful, yet unheard-of, drug cartels, Hezbollah training camps in Latin America and the like.
In summary, the Guardian is passing a pure propaganda piece under the guise of clarifying the upcoming Constituent Assembly elections in Venezuela. Quite clearly the next few days will be crucial, as the opposition ramps up its violent regime change efforts and the US blares out its threats, while on the other side chavismo is mobilising for this important step and (true) solidarity movements are standing with the Venezuelan poor and working-class.
As for the Guardian, whenever they ask you to support “quality, independent journalism”, you should look for it someplace else…)
- Even if this number were true, that would still make Maduro more popular than the presidents of Colombia, Mexico and Brazil, staunch US allies in the region.
Q & A: The National Constituent Assembly in Venezuela
Venezuela Solidarity Campaign | Venezuelanalysis | July 24, 2017
Elections for a National Constituent Assembly are being held in Venezuela on July 30th. Here are some common questions – with the answers – that are being asked about the Assembly. (21/07/17)
What is a National Constituent Assembly (ANC), under Venezuelan law?
A National Constituent Assembly is essentially a constitutional convention, a gathering for the purpose of writing a new constitution or revising an existing constitution. Apart from the famous examples from the 18th century America and France, a range of other countries have employed this mechanism. In Venezuela, Article 347 of its constitution says:
“The original constituent power rests with the people of Venezuela. This power may be exercised by calling a National Constituent Assembly for the purpose of transforming the State, creating a new juridical order and drawing up a new Constitution.”
Venezuela’s constitution is itself the product of a constitutional convention held in 1999, convened at the initiative of President Chávez to draft a new constitution. The constitution was later endorsed by referendum in December 1999. New general elections were held under the new constitution in July 2000. This marked the transition from the Fourth Republic of Venezuela to the present-day Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela
Is President Maduro allowed to call for the setting up of a Constituent Assembly?
Article 348 of the constitution provides for how a National Constituent Assembly is to be instigated:
“The initiative for calling a National Constituent Assembly may emanate from the President of the Republic sitting with the Cabinet of Ministers; from the National Assembly by a two-thirds vote of its members; from the Municipal Councils in open session, by a two-thirds vote of their members; and from 15% of the voters registered with the Civil and Electoral Registry.”
It is also important to note what Article 349 of the constitution says, bearing in mind (as explained later) that the right-wing opposition coalition, which has a majority in the National Assembly, is opposed to the calling of a National Constituent Assembly:
Article 349: “The President of the Republic shall not have the power to object to the new Constitution. The existing constituted authorities shall not be permitted to obstruct the Constituent Assembly in any way. For purposes of the promulgation of the new Constitution, the same shall be published in the Official Gazette of the Republic of Venezuela or in the Gazette of the Constituent Assembly.”
Why has President Maduro called for a National Constituent Assembly?
In a formal document which he signed in front of the National Electoral Council (CNE), President Maduro stated that the call for the Constituent Assembly was made in the context of the current social, political and economic circumstances in which there are severe internal and external threats against democracy and the constitutional order.
This refers to the right-wing opposition-led violence aimed at bringing down the elected Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro. The violence began in early April, resulting so far in scores of deaths and over 1,200 people injured. A key tactic in the violent protests is the use of ‘guarimbas’ or street blockades created by masked protesters.
The current violence has involved attacks on state facilities and services such as maternity hospitals, electricity supplies, food depots and public transport, and also targeted assassinations of government supporters. A ramping up of the aggression occurred in late June when a police officer flying a stolen helicopter attacked the Ministry of Interior building and the Supreme Court, firing shots and dropping four grenades.
The purpose of the Constituent Assembly has been expounded on by former Education Minister Elias Jaua, who explained in an interview with Televen, a private Venezuela TV channel, that its aims were “to maintain political stability, to solve the economic issues, to broaden and to strengthen the system of social welfare [and] to heal the social wounds that have come up during the conflict”.
When and how will the Constituent Assembly be made up?
Elections for Constituent Assembly are scheduled to take place on 30 July 2017.
Anybody, regardless of political persuasion, can be nominated or nominate themselves to be a candidate for election to the Constituent Assembly.
Candidates may be nominated in one of the following ways:
• by their own initiative.
• by the initiative of groups of voters and voters.
• by the initiative of the sectoral groups comprising173 seats of the 545 seat Constituent Assembly (see infogram)

In order to run for office on their own initiative, 3% of voters and voters registered in the electoral registry of the municipalities are required to nominate the constituents. In the sector category, the candidates will be nominated by the corresponding sector, and should receive the backing of 3% of the sector to which they belong.
From these various ways of being nominated, there are over 6,000 candidates competing for Constituent Assembly seats.
In keeping with how previous elections have been organised, the National Electoral Council (CNE) organised a ‘trial run’ of voting arrangements for the Constituent Assembly, setting up nearly 2,000 voting booths in voting centres across the country, in order to be assured that on election day everything would run smoothly and efficiently..
How will a new constitution emerge?
Once elected, the National Constituent Assembly will be convened within 72 hours and will get to work.
The Assembly will set its agenda for discussion on the basis of what it sees as national priorities. As convenor of the Assembly, however, the President has proposed nine topics for the Assembly to consider:
• the nation’s right and need for peace
• improvements to the country’s economy
• constitutional recognition of the various ‘Missions’ (government social programmes)
• an extension of the justice system’s scope, to end impunity for crimes
• constitutional recognition of new forms of popular and participatory democracy in Venezuela, such as communal councils and communes
• the defence of Venezuela’s sovereignty and protection against foreign intervention
• reinvigorating the plural, multicultural character of Venezuela
• a guarantee for the future of Venezuela’s youth through enshrining in the constitution their rights and the need to preserve life on the planet

Symbol of the National Constituent Assembly from government media campaign. Text: “The constituent [assembly] is going ahead!”
What is the right-wing opposition’s response to the National Constituent Assembly initiative?
Venezuela’s right-wing opposition, the so-called ‘Roundtable of Democratic Unity’ (MUD) coalition, originally announced in May that it would boycott the National Constituent Assembly and denounced it as an illegitimate effort to rewrite the nation’s constitution.
This is seemingly in contrast to the position it held in 2013, when 55 opposition leaders signed a joint statement in support of setting up a constituent assembly.
Considering the opposition’s claim about the depth of the government’s unpopularity, echoed by most of the media, it is puzzling that opposition candidates will not be contesting all Constituent Assembly seats.
Instead of taking part in this legitimate constitutional process, the opposition held on July 16 their own unofficial plebiscite, asking whether voters recognised or rejected the Constituent Assembly process. Turnout levels for this exercise have been hotly disputed, since the process was not conducted under the auspices of the National Electoral Council and the voting was not independently audited.
How does this Constituent Assembly initiative fit with current peace and dialogue initiatives?
The convening of a Constituent Assembly is a key part of ongoing efforts by President Maduro to engage in constructive dialogue with the opposition.
The dialogue process was launched last year between the government and opposition sectors, but the right-wing MUD coalition has refused to participate.
Some opposition parties have accepted the offer of dialogue. Seventeen Venezuelan opposition parties met with the government to discuss the Constituent Assembly in May 2017. The parties who accepted the invitation included Citizenship Movement, Mopivene Movement, Republican Democracy, Republican Movement, Labour Power, Red Flag, Civilian Resistance, Renewable Democracy, Ecological Movement, Young Party and the Stone Party.
In an attempt to pursue dialogue, in early June Maduro sent a letter to Pope Francis asking him to mediate the political conflict with opposition sectors that have encouraged violence in the streets. Pope Francis has repeatedly urged dialogue between sectors in Venezuela, criticising part of the opposition for not being willing to sit down for talks, but without success. He has also called on Venezuelan bishops to denounce “any form of violence.”
President Maduro has followed this by again renewing his call for the opposition to agree to dialogue and peace, in order that solutions can be arrived at to meet the needs and well-being of the Venezuelan people. He has emphasised that these solutions can only be arrived at through cooperation and peace.
US Agrees to Clean Up World War II Mustard Gas Stockpile in Panama
Sputnik – 18.07.2017
The US has come to an agreement with Panama to destroy a stockpile of mustard gas left over from secret human tests conducted by the Americans during and shortly after World War II.
Tiny San Jose Island, with an area of 17 square miles and a permanent population of 10, once hosted a contingent of 200 US soldiers who began conducting chemical warfare testing from 1945 to 1947. Seventy years later, eight mustard gas bombs still remain undetonated on the island, and one Panamanian report claimed that there could be as many as 3,000 other bombs that still haven’t been found.
Panama has repeatedly pushed the United States to destroy the bombs since they were discovered in 2002, and the US only agreed to do so in 2017. Previously, Washington offered to pay for the training of Panamanians to dispose of the bombs, so long as the small Central American republic released the US from liability.
Panama refused and demanded that Washington clean the mess up themselves. As the American government took a hardline stance against the use of chemical weapons during the Syrian Civil War, it became increasingly amenable to the disposal of such weapons it created in decades past.
The disposal will begin in September 2017 and will take six to eight weeks, according to Panamanian officials. It will be overseen by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.
In a new wrinkle, the Canadian Department of National Defense (DND) has revealed that they may also have mustard gas and other chemical weapons on the island. Ottawa is not going to participate in the disposal of the bombs, according to a statement from Global Affairs Canada, but in the past Canada has denied involvement in the San Jose weapons tests.
In fact, the new DND file notes that most of the mustard gas, as well as roughly 1,000 of the bombs used in the San Jose tests, were Canada-made. Canadian scientists helped design some of the tests, and Canadian pilots flew the planes that dropped chemical bombs during the experiments.
Furthermore, Canada used heavy duty metal shipping containers to transport mustard gas to the island — containers durable enough to have survived 70 years of weathering and decay. Mustard gas decomposes very slowly, especially outside of water, meaning much of the soil in San Jose may be contaminated.
Susan Smith, a professor of history at the University of Alberta and an expert on the use of mustard gas during World War II, said that Canada was a significant participant in the chemical weapons tests on San Jose Island. “This was an area where Canada indeed punched above its own weight,” Smith told the Ottawa Citizen. “Canada has a moral commitment to help clean up the mess it created.”
She added that the San Jose experiments tested how soldiers of different races reacted to mustard gas exposure, with white, Puerto Rican, black, and Japanese soldiers all being exposed.
“It felt like you were on fire,” then-93-year-old Rollins Edwards told NPR in 2015. Edwards served in the US Army during the war and was party to the mustard gas tests. “Guys started screaming and hollering and trying to break out. And then some of the guys fainted. And finally they opened the door and let us out, and the guys were just, they were in bad shape.”
Edwards says he still gets rashes and flaky skin from the chemical burns he suffered 70 years ago.
In 1974, a construction worker on San Jose Island suffered mysterious chemical burns. In 2001, Panama discovered the existence of the chemical weapons and asked Canada to assist in a comprehensive search for bombs in the island’s jungles, but Canada said no.
Most countries who fought in World War II did not use chemical weapons against enemy combatants. The Imperial Japanese did, but only against other Asian nations such as China. The Americans did at one point consider the use of mustard gas against the Japanese in the last days of the war, but opted for atomic weapons instead.
Canada, Panama and the United States are all signatories to the 1992 United Nations Chemical Weapons Convention, which stipulates that all chemical weapons worldwide are to be destroyed. The US government has disposed of 90 percent of its 37,000-ton stockpile of chemical weapons since then.
Ecuador’s Public Healthcare System Named Most Innovative by UN
teleSUR | July 3, 2017
Public health care in Ecuador was internationally recognized as the most innovative and progressive in the world when they were awarded the United Nations Public Service Award.
The prestigious award, presented on June 23, praised the South American country’s delivery of health services which Ecuadoreans have access to through the Public Health Network (RPIS), from which stem other branches of state medical aid such as the Ministry of Public Health (MSP), Ecuadorean Institute of Social Security (ISSFA), and the National Police Social Security Institute (ISSPOL).
Ecuadoreans will receive medical attention from any one of these institutions at any location, irrespective of their member status or their economic situation per the country’s constitution which guarantees free health care.
Additionally, Ecuador’s public health takes a step further, breaking convention and putting the welfare of its citizens first. In the case that a medical procedure is not available in the country, the patient in sent outside the country to undergo medical aid, free of charge.
One such case was that of Sofia Echeverria, a young woman who had suffered from biliary atresia, a sickness of the liver, since birth. As liver transplant is impossible in Ecuador, she was sent to the Austral Hospital in Argentina to undergo surgery.
Since its initiation, RPIS has treated more than 8 million patients and members the state medical institutions as well as transferred 40,000 to outside private services.
“This has implied great changes in our institutions and state officials attitude since the system was divided and full of barriers that did not allow citizens to benefit from hospital services due to the lack of funds,” Minister of Health, Veronica Espinosa stated.
Espinosa said that despite the progress made, there is still much left to do.
The minister explained the need for a legislative framework which will guarantee universal medical care for future generations – a proposal that will be discussed at the National Assembly.
7 Dead as Venezuela Violence Escalates
By Ryan Mallett-Outtrim and Lucas Koerner – Venezuelanalysis – June 29, 2017
Seven people have died across Venezuela over the past 48 hours, as violent anti-government protests continue nationwide.
The latest deaths include Isael Macadan Aquino, who was shot while participating in a protest in Anzoategui. Details of the shooting remain unclear, though local media has reported the protest may have devolved into looting, and authorities have stated Aquino is believed to have been shot during an “irregular situation” inside a commercial property. Two men have been arrested in connection to the shooting, though authorities are yet to suggest a motive.
Meanwhile in Venezuela’s second largest city of Maracaibo, protester Luigin Paz (20) died Wednesday at an opposition barricade when, according to the Public Prosecution (MP), he was “run over by a tanker truck”. Further details have yet to be made public.
In a separate incident in Maracaibo that same day, an unnamed motorcyclist was also fatally run over by a truck at an opposition barricade.
The death occured when the truck came under attack by opposition protesters, according to local press reports.
“We came across the barricade .. and those who had blocked the way began throwing stones at us to loot the truck and when we went in reverse, we hit the motorcycle,” said Jose Bravo, a passenger in the truck.
“[The motorcyclist] lay injured on the road and then they threw Molotov cocktails at us and set the truck on fire. The boy burned to death and my colleague and I were rescued,” Bravo told reporters.
According to Emergency Services Director Jorge Galindo, Bravo suffered burns on 95 percent of his body and is currently hospitalized undergoing treatment.
A fourth death was also publicly announced in Caracas late Tuesday, when protester Jhonatan Jose Zavatti Serrano died of gunshot wounds sustained the day before. According to the MP, Zavatti was walking in Petare Monday evening when he came across a protest and was shot in the head. A district attorney has been dispatched to investigate.
A further death has been confirmed in the north-central state of Aragua. Alfredo Figuera (18) was walking down a street in Maracay Monday afternoon when he passed a demonstration and was hit in the head by a bullet allegedly fired by two suspects on a motorcycle, the MP has reported. The youth died in the hospital on Thursday. Maracay has been the scene of heavy anti-government rioting in recent days, which on Monday alone saw the looting of 68 businesses as well as attacks on public institutions and left-wing political party offices.
Two more deaths have also been reported in Venezuelan media, but haven’t been confirmed by authorities. These include Roberto Duran, who was allegedly killed during violence at a protest in Lara state, and Victor Betancourt in Sucre. The circumstances of Betancourt’s death remain fiercely disputed, with opposition supporters claiming he was killed during a protest, while at least one local journalist has suggested he may have been involved in a traffic incident while returning from buying bread.
The latest deaths bring the overall death toll in 13 weeks of violent anti-government protests to at least 92, including 13 dead at the hands of authorities and 24 attributable to opposition political violence.
More unrest has also been reported in Caracas, with the opposition-controlled National Assembly (AN) allegedly coming under attack late Tuesday. Opposition figures have accused government supporters of shooting fireworks at the assembly building, and there were reports of improvised explosives being used outside. Amid the chaos, a video went viral on social media of a military officer arguing with AN head and opposition leader Julio Borges. The argument ended with the National Guard’s Colonel Vladimir Lugo shoving an enraged Borges out of the room.
The latest unrest came in the wake of a high profile terrorist attack on Venezuela’s Supreme Court and the offices of the Ministry of Justice. Carried out by a rogue police officer, the assailant used a stolen helicopter to drop grenades and fire at government buildings. The helicopter was found abandoned in an isolated region of Vargas state, though the pilot remains at large.
Venezuela: Soldier Killed, Three More Burned Alive
By Lucas Koerner | Venezuelanalysis | June 27, 2017
Caracas – One National Guardsman has been killed and three people set on fire across Venezuela as violent anti-government protests continue for a 13th week.
In Aragua, National Guard Sergeant Ronny Alberto Parra Araujo (27) died Tuesday of wounds sustained during what the Public Prosecution (MP) has described as an “irregular situation” the day before.
Journalist Ramón Camacho has reported that Parra was shot while attempting to prevent a looting at the Walio Supermarket in Maracay on Monday evening. The Araguan capital was the scene of widespread unrest following the opposition’s call to block roads nationwide earlier that day. Sixty-eight business were looted and several public institutions were attacked, including a fire station, a national telephone company switchboard, and a national tax administration office.
The MP has dispatched a state district attorney to investigate the sergeant’s death. The Public Prosecution has also opened an inquiry into the non-fatal shooting of three other National Guard soldiers in another incident in Miranda state on Monday.
In Lara state, two residents of a government-built Great Venezuelan Housing Mission (GMVV) apartment complex were attacked and burned alive by opposition militants late Friday evening.
According to testimony by the local communal council, Henry Escalona (21) and Wladimir Peña (27) were returning from a nearby party at 11:45pm when they were accosted by a group of eight masked men, who demanded to know if they were “Chavistas”. When the youths replied that they were government supporters, the assailants pulled out firearms and ordered them to kneel.
As one of the young men attempted to escape, the masked militants doused them both in gasoline and set the men ablaze.
“Simply for living in Residencias Larenses, an apartment complex built under the revolution, these youths were burned,” affirmed community council spokesman Luis Rodriguez.
Escalona and Peña are currently in critical condition, undergoing treatment for third degree burns in the local Maria Pineda Central Hospital. The community is requesting that both men be transferred to a burn unit operated by the oil industry in the western city of Maracaibo.
Meanwhile, in the upscale eastern Caracas neighborhood of La Castellana, another man was stabbed and set on fire by masked individuals who reportedly accused her of being a Chavista.
“A young man identified as Giovanny Gonzalez (24) was burned and stabbed by masked men en La Castellana, who mistook him for a Chavista,” declared Interior Minister Nestor Reverol via Twitter on Monday.
The minister indicated that Gonzalez had been “transported to a healthcare center and is in a stable state”, but offered no further details.
During a public event on Tuesday, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro condemned the aggressions, calling for the “unity of the people in the face of fascist violence”.
The attacks are the latest in a series of opposition lynchings of persons accused of being Chavista “infiltrators” or thieves. On June 3, 21-year-old Orlando Figuera died in the hospital after being stabbed and burned alive by a mob of anti-government protesters in Altamira. The Public Prosecution has yet to issue a statement on the latest lynchings.
In another incident in eastern Caracas, a woman was accosted in a shopping mall by scores of opposition supporters Saturday who mistook her for the wife of a state television show host.
In a widely circulated video, the woman is seen being verbally and physically assaulted by more than a hundred protesters screaming “murderer”.
National Ombudsman Tarek William Saab denounced the incident as a “hate crime”, which he warned could, if left unchecked, be the “prologue to a civil war”.
“To pursue and attack a human being with intention to hurt or kill them for their ideological position is repugnant,” he tweeted on Sunday.
Likewise, in another mall in Chacao, representatives of a communal council were harassed Saturday when they arrived to make a bank deposit for the sale of government-sponsored Local Production and Supply Committee (CLAP) food bags. The grassroots leaders from the nearby town of Galipan had to be escorted by National Guard personnel to safeguard their security.
Three National Guard Officials Arrested After Fatal Shooting of Protester
By Rachael Boothroyd Rojas | Venezuelanalysis | June 21, 2017
Caracas – Three Bolivarian National Guard (GNB) soldiers have been arrested following the fatal shooting of an anti-government protester in Caracas this past Monday.
First sergeant Raymon Ávila León and second sergeants Johan Rojas Díaz and Jesús Baez Rojas will be charged with the misuse of a firearm, according to national ombudsman, William Saab.
On Monday, 17 year old Fabian Urbina died from gunshot wounds when GNB soldiers opened fire on a crowd of protesters in the eastern district of Altamira. Five other demonstrators were also injured in the incident.
In footage of the confrontation circulated by the private media channel La Patilla on social media, hundreds of violent protesters can be seen attempting to attack several GNB officials prior to the shooting. At least one of the protesters was armed, leading some pro-government observers to speculate that the soldiers were acting in self defense.
But Saab condemned the incident Wednesday and stated that the national guard must only employ “proportional, progressive and differentiated use of force” to ensure their own safety at protests.
In a series of tweets, the national ombudsman reminded the public that the GNB are banned from using live ammunition or rubber bullets to control unrest. He also called on opposition sectors to cease their violent protests.
“We once again call on the organizers of demonstrations to carry them out peacefully and without the use of weapons,” he tweeted.
Following the incident, President Nicolas Maduro replaced Antonio Benavides Torres as the commander of the National Bolivarian Guard. The former commander of the People’s Guard, Major General Sergio José Rivero Marcano, will now take up the position.
The president also changed the commander-in-chiefs of the armed forces, navy, airforce, and people’s militia, as well as put Major General Juan de Jesús García Toussaintt and Admiral Orlando Maneiro Gaspar in charge of the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Fishing.
It is unknown if the high level reshuffle was related to Monday’s deadly shooting.
Eighty-four people have been killed since violence anti-government unrest broke out at the beginning of April. Protesters, national security personnel, pro-government activists and passersby are all amongst the dead.
Colombia: Bogota Mall Explosion Leaves 3 Dead, 11 Injured
ELN: “There are those who try to tear apart the peace process”
teleSUR | June 18, 2017
Colombian authorities searched Sunday for the perpetrators of a bombing at a major upscale shopping center in Bogota that killed three and left nine others injured in an attack Saturday some have suggested could be an attempt to benefit from fear in the country [which is] implementing peace after more than half a century of civil war.
Authorities reported that an explosion hit a second-floor women’s bathroom at the Andino Commercial Center in Bogota on Saturday night. The shopping center, one of the busiest in the country, was evacuated, while President Juan Manuel Santos returned to the capital from the northern coastal city of Barranquilla to respond to the blast.
“This is a vile, cruel, cowardly act and we are not going to rest until those responsible are captured,” Santos said, adding that there were no indications that another attack was planned in Bogota. The president also expressed solidarity with the victims, while Bogota Mayor Enrique Peñalosa described the incident as a “cowardly terrorist attack.”
Both the FARC and the ELN, the country’s two largest guerrilla groups, condemned the attack and voiced support for the victims.
“Solidarity with the victims in Bogota today,” FARC leader Rodrigo Londoño, also known as Timoleon Jimenez or Timochenko, wrote on his Twitter account Saturday to 95,400 followers. “This act can only come from those who want to close the paths to peace and reconciliation.”
The bombing comes just days before the FARC is set to hand over the last of its weapons to a U.N. monitoring mission as part of a historic peace agreement reached with the government last year paving the way for the guerrilla’s disarmament and transition into a legal political party.
The ELN, currently in peace talks with the government, also responded to the attack.
“ELN Peace repudiates the attack against civilians in the Andino Commercial Center. We share the pain and express solidarity with the victims,” the group’s peace delegation wrote on its Twitter account Saturday to 27,600 followers.
The active rebel army — which has yet to reach a bilateral ceasefire agreement with the government and who claimed responsibility for a bombing outside a bull ring in Bogota in February — was quick to be signaled as a possible suspect in the attack, an assumption the group rejected in its response to the bombing.
“ELN Peace calls for seriousness from those who make unfounded and reckless accusations; there are those who try to tear apart the peace process,” the ELN peace delegation continued, calling for a thorough investigation.
“The ELN will never again carry actions whose objective is to affect the civilian population,” the statement concluded.
The three victims of the attack included a 23-year-old French national, identified as Julie Hunh, who had reportedly been in Colombia for the past six months doing volunteer work.
The U.S. Embassy in Bogota offered condolences in a series of tweets, saying that it is standing by to “provide any support requested by the Colombian authorities.”
Another Social Leader Murdered in Colombia
teleSUR | June 14, 2017
Jose Maria Lemus, president of the Tibu Community Board in Colombia’s North of Santander state, has been killed, the Peoples’ Congress reported Wednesday.
His murder adds to the growing list of recently assassinated social, Indigenous and human rights activists in the South American country.
In May, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights raised alarm over the fact that at least 41 activists have been killed in Colombia so far this year, a record figure in comparison to previous years. The report laid bare to a troubling escalation of violence despite a historic agreement between the government and the country’s largest rebel army last year.
U.N. commissioner Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein said the figure shows a worsening trend of crimes against social leaders and human rights defenders.
“It’s an increase over the same period last year and the previous years, and it is very alarming,” he said during a news conference.
According to Zeid, the attacks appear to be concentrated in areas that the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia previously controlled during the armed conflict and recently abandoned in order to demobilize after the signing of the peace agreement.
Official statistics show that a staggering 156 social leaders were killed in Colombia in the 14 months between Jan. 1, 2016 and March 1, 2017. Amid the crisis, rights groups have urged the Colombian government to prioritize tackling paramilitary violence that often targets progressive social leaders including campesinos, Indigenous activists and other human rights defenders.
On Monday, organizations such as the Agrarian Summit, Black Communities Process and the Peoples’ Congress protested against the criminalization of social leaders.




