Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on June 3rd, 2010

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Mr. Sweet.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Señora Bolivar, thank you very much for your testimony.

I want to confirm a couple of things from your testimony and then ask you a question. You mentioned numbers like 1,507 peasants who are detained right now, and that there are steelworkers who are under presentation to the courts.

Provea has a good reputation. You've actually gone into prisons to visit people, and from time to time your organization does survey the legal proceedings as well. You've made it clear, too, that anybody who criticizes Chávez becomes an enemy and is a friend of the empire.

Do you not fear for your own safety?

[Ligia Bolivar Osuna]

The figures I mention here come from a joint report done by Provea y Espacio Público, which is an organization that works on freedom of expression and includes demonstrations as well. They are consistent figures, because they have contact with the trade unions and the peasants' organizations, and they do follow some cases in the legal system, such as the one I mentioned, that of Rubén González among others. So I think there are enough grounds on which to think this information is reliable.

With regard to safety and security, I personally don't have any problems so far, but there are others who have had those problems. That doesn't make me any happier, but I don't want to be a target anyway.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Yes, but you are here criticizing the Chávez regime.

[Ligia Bolivar Osuna]

To tell you the truth, I thought that perhaps after coming back from this meeting I would start having problems because of this, but it's part of our job.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

We had some interesting testimony in the past. We had some testimony that said the military--I'm paraphrasing, but this is how I interpreted it--were kind of the “freedom friendly” outreach for the government and were amongst the people and celebrating the Constitution with them on a regular basis. Then we also had some testimony that--

[Ligia Bolivar Osuna]

Sorry--they were friendly what?

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

The testimony inferred that the individuals, the military soldiers, were amongst the people and were kind of an outreach for the government, kind of, for lack of better words, a friendly welcoming committee.

We also heard that the military is training ordinary Venezuelans in arms and weapons because the people fear that there's going to be an insurgency, and that there is an imminent, clear, and present danger of invasion from Colombia. Is that what the average person in Venezuela thinks?

[Ligia Bolivar Osuna]

With regard to the first question, as you probably know, President Chávez has created these so-calledmisiones, or missions, in many areas--education, health, literacy, food, you name it. In those missions, the low ranks of the military play a very key role. It's a way of in fact making them closer to the population, making them closer to the social problems. That's something that's been on the table for a long time, how to close the gap between the military and society, and I think probably President Chávez thought it was a good and positive way to do it.

I have no objections whatsoever to that close link between civil society and the military, because I think that's in favour of democracy. However, there's another side to it that is risky--namely, when you start giving weapons to civilians who are not controlled, who are not part of the organization of the state. Our Constitution is very clear. We have four branches. And now we have a fifth branch that is not part of the Constitution and that is only accountable to President Chávez directly.

In the last military parade that took place, on April 19, a civilian celebration of our 200 years of independence, the main official celebration was a military parade in which 30,000 civilians were in the parade and wearing weapons. That was very shocking for the population. In fact, the former director of public security for catástrofes--I never know how to say it, sorry—made a statement of criticism right after that parade, because it was very shocking for many military to see their colleagues, or their former colleagues, marching and shouting slogans in favour of the revolution, in favour of socialism, and behind them also seeing these 30,000 civilians marching with weapons that belong to the state and therefore to us; they were not a particular group identified with a political project.

With regard to the issue of Colombia, it is, as you probably know, almost the last resort of many governments who are losing popularity to invent a foreign enemy. Fujimori did it. The military junta in Argentina did it. There are many examples of people trying to use fictitious foreign enemies to try to pull the country together. Fortunately for Venezuela--fortunately for our peace--Chávez has been unable to put in motion that resort. People are not willing to go to war with Colombia. We all have people and family in Colombia; my grandmother was from Colombia.

A few days after he started that last year, when he ordered the minister of defence to move I don't know how many people to the border.... They never arrived, by the way, thank goodness. All the comments you heard on the radio were the same: we don't want a confrontation with Colombia, we're brothers, we're sisters, we don't need this.

It was very different from the reaction in Venezuela during the Malvinas/Falklands crisis, when everybody was against the United States, everybody was against the United Kingdom. It was very different from the Caldas crisis we had many years ago, when the vessel Caldas from Colombia entered into what we considered to be our national sea. That created a big confrontation and had people shouting in the streets and making very aggressive statements on radio and television. That didn't happen this time.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, how much time do I have?

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

You have a few minutes.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Okay.

Señora Bolivar, in your testimony, you talked about the lack of independence of the judiciary and commented that there's been direct interference in their functions. You even brought our attention to the fact that the president of the Supreme Court said just last December, “We cannot continue thinking of a division of powers because that is a principle that weakens the State.”

This is a fundamental question of democracy we're talking about here, the division of powers, the independence of the judiciary. As a lawyer, I can appreciate that from a practice perspective, but you're not the first person to draw this to our attention. We have had previous officials comment on the lack of an independent judiciary, and this just makes it that much more prominent.

We've had a quote here from the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, who also raised concern about a lack of judicial independence in Venezuela. Then you raised the situation of Judge Afiuni, which I noticed was an emotional experience for you.

Can you highlight for us to what extent is it valid to state that Venezuela's weak judiciary perpetuates human rights abuses?

[Ligia Bolivar Osuna]

Absolutely, I think that's a valid statement to make. The impunity takes place basically because there is a lack of independence among powers.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

If the courts, the judiciary, are so willing to accede to President Chávez's demands, as you pointed out in the case of Ms. Afiuni and the situation where, the day after her declaration, there was a national TV and radio broadcast and she was incarcerated, are there any checks left on President Chávez?

[Ligia Bolivar Osuna]

I think we count on the international community. Even then it's very difficult. This morning there was a hearing at the UN Human Rights Council about Afiuni. I understand, but haven't seen, that there was a very strong confrontation between the Venezuelan ambassador to the UN bodies in Geneva and the special rapporteur.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

So you're saying there are no longer any checks and balances on the president within the country?

[Ligia Bolivar Osuna]

There are very few. You can have some members of congress saying some things. Let me put it this way, you can say it, but it doesn't have any practical consequences.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

That leads to another situation that we've heard about, which is that if you say things that are insulting to the president, you could be punished by between 6 and 30 months in prison without bail. Is that true?

[Ligia Bolivar Osuna]

Yes. We recently had, I think it was early this year, the case of a student demonstration in Barcelona and Puerto La Cruz on the east coast of Venezuela. It was one of these so-called authorized demonstrations, so there shouldn't have been any repression of it, but in the written statement that rests in the courts, the reason given for the repression of the demonstration is that one of the policemen says that some students were shouting offensive words against their commander president, and therefore they were forced to use chemical weapons. With that illustration, I think I can....

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

One of my last questions is about the fact that you drew to our attention that career judges had dropped to about 10%. Could you just elaborate on that? What is the significance of that?

[Ligia Bolivar Osuna]

About what?

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Career judges have dropped to about 10%. Could you elaborate on the significance of that?

[Ligia Bolivar Osuna]

The significance is that appointments are discretionary. If someone doesn't enter the judiciary through concursos, credential scrutiny, or a kind of test—they used to have psychological tests, and they had to have credentials in terms of post-graduate studies and so on—and people are just being appointed in a discretionary way, then they are basically being appointed by friends.

I can give you an example. The president of the criminal courts in Caracas is very close to President Chávez. In her circuit, her son has direct influence in decisions. He is paid by the judiciary. Nobody knows what exactly he's doing there, and he's the boyfriend of another judge who happens to be the same judge who is looking at Judge Afiuni's case. According to the law, you cannot give a case to a judge; it has to go through a computerized distribution process. She received that case in her hands, without this form of distribution.

She's also responsible for the case of two students who are very prominent leaders of the student movement. She's responsible for the case of Richard Blanco, who is an aide of the mayor of the metropolitan area of Caracas. In these cases, she has always put people in prison. In two cases, they have already been released, but on bail. The case continues.

She's also responsible for two cases that remain...which are the bomb attack against a major synagogue in Caracas and the attacks openly recognized by the group La Piedrita against Globovisión and other media's public offices, as well as threats against journalists. La Piedrita is almost a paramilitary group. She's responsible for the investigation. At some point, the situation with La Piedrita was so disturbing that even President Chávez said this guy has to be investigated, and the next day he was out of the country. The rest of the members of La Piedrita are being investigated.

All these cases are in her court, and she's the girlfriend of the son of the head of that circuit. A year and a half ago, she was a secretary.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

She doesn't have any legal training?