Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) (Ratification: 1964)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment

The Committee notes the joint observations of the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions (CODESA), the Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (CTV), the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations of Venezuela (FAPUV), the Independent Trade Union Alliance Confederation of Workers (CTASI), the National Union of Workers of Venezuela (UNETE) and the United Federation of Workers of Venezuela (CUTV), received on 20 August 2023. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing political opinions or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee recalls that several provisions of the national legislation can result in the application of custodial sentences (presidio or prisión) – involving compulsory labour under sections 12 and 15 of the Criminal Code and section 64 of the Basic Prison Code – for infringements that could be linked to activities in which persons express political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, in particular:

• The Criminal Code: sections 147 and 148 (offending or showing a lack of respect for the President of the Republic or for a number of public authorities; section 149 (public denigration of the National Assembly, the Supreme Court of Justice, and so forth); sections 222 and 225 (offending the honour, reputation or prestige of a member of the National Assembly or a public servant, or of a judicial or a political body); section 226 (proof of the truth of the facts is not admitted); and sections 442 and 444 (defamation).
• The Constitutional Act against hatred, for peaceful coexistence and tolerance (Act No. 41.274 of 8 November 2017): sections 20 and 21 (inciting hatred, real or alleged membership to a determined political group constituting an aggravating circumstance to the infringement).

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report that it categorically rejects any allegations of infringements of the right to freedom of expression within its territory and specifies that social movements aimed at expressing political opinions opposed to the established political, social or economic order are not criminalized. It states that Venezuelans can exercise their right to freedom of thought, the free development of their personality and their right to protest in full freedom, as guaranteed by the Constitution. It highlights that the State is nevertheless bound to ensure respect of the rights of others, and that certain limitations to the rights in question are provided for in the legislation for this purpose. It falls to the judge to penalize the conduct prohibited by the legislation and to impose a penalty proportionate to the offence found and the damage caused, as part of a due process. With regard to compulsory labour for persons who receive custodial sentences, the Committee notes that the Government provides detailed information on the possibility of receiving alternative penalties to imprisonment. The Government also adds that, since the entry into force of the Constitution in 1999, no penalty of presidio has been handed down. The Committee notes this information and observes that the Government has not referred to the penalty of prisión, which, like the penalty of presidio, is a custodial sentence including compulsory labour. Furthermore, it once again notes with regret the absence of information from the Government on the use in practice of the national legislative provisions referred to above and the penalties imposed in this context.

In this regard, the Committee notes that, in their joint observations, CODESA, the CTV, FAPUV, CTASI, UNETE and the CUTV underscore the purely normative nature of the information provided by the Government which merely refers to the current criminal procedure without mentioning any measure taken to put an end to the violations of the Convention. The trade union organizations indicate that the criminalization of peaceful social protests and the expression of political views other than those of the party in power has continued, with the Centre for Justice and Peace (CEPAZ) documenting 523 cases of persecution and repression in 2022 alone. The trade union organizations add the many trade unionists and trade union leaders, as well as workers, especially in the public sector, have been arrested, prosecuted and convicted for having organized or participated in protests in defence of their labour rights, particularly for “treason”, “terrorism” and “inciting hatred”. According to the trade union organizations, the above-mentioned laws are used arbitrarily to criminalize legitimate trade union activities and the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and peaceful protest.

The Committee also notes that since its last examination in 2020, several United Nations bodies have expressed their increasing concerns at the allegations of intimidation, reprisal and criminalization of persons who are considered voices dissident to the Government and its programme (annual reports of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela - A/HRC/53/54, 4 July 2023; A/HRC/50/59, 12 August 2022; and A/HRC/47/55, 16 June 2021; United Nations Special Rapporteurs on freedom of association and peaceful assembly, and on promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism – communication reports VEN 4/2022, VEN 9/2021, VEN 7/2021, VEN 5/2020; treaty bodies of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Universal Periodic Review). The Committee notes in particular that, in its report on terrorism and human rights, the United Nations Secretary-General highlighted that in Venezuela, vaguely formulated criminal offences related to organized crime and terrorism have been used to stigmatize and criminalize civil society and the media (A/76/273, 6 August 2021). It also notes that, in its concluding observations of November 2023, the United Nations Human Rights Committee expressed its concerns about various sources of information referring to serious restrictions to freedom of opinion and expression in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, in particular to political opposition to the Government, such as harassment, intimidation, surveillance, persecution, excessive use of defamation, arbitrary arrest and detention of journalists, human rights defenders and political activists considered critical of the Government and its programme, and recourse to above-mentioned Act No. 41.274 to restrict freedom of expression (CCPR/C/VEN/CO/5, 3 November 2023).

It also notes that, in its report published in September 2023, the independent international fact-finding mission on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela indicated that: (i) in at least 58 cases since 2020, people have been arbitrarily detained as part of a selective crackdown on real or alleged opponents of the Government; (ii) trade union leaders continued to be persecuted, with six trade union leaders sentenced on 1 August 2023 to 16 years’ imprisonment for terrorism; (iii) relatives of the main suspects in these cases, particularly women, have been arbitrarily detained on serious charges such as treason and terrorism; and (iv) in several cases, people who received custodial sentences remained in prison even after a judge ordered their immediate release, a trend that disproportionately affects those convicted of opposition to the Government. The independent international mission also indicated that it had reasonable grounds to believe that, in the context of the ongoing humanitarian and economic crisis, the criminal justice system in Venezuela has been used to punish, silence and quash criticism, or real or alleged opposition to the Government, in particular journalists, trade unionists, human rights defenders and political activists, by charging these individuals with arbitrary, and often serious, criminal accusations, based on provisions of the Criminal Code, the Basic Act against organized crime and the financing of terrorism of 2012, and Act No. 41.274 (A/HRC/54/57, 22 September 2023).

Lastly, the Committee notes the decisions and discussions held at the 344th, 345th, 346th and 347th Sessions of the Governing Body (March, June and October–November 2022 and March 2023) on the developments concerning the social dialogue forum that aim to give effect to the recommendations made to the Government by the Commission of Inquiry on the application of the Minimum Wage-Fixing Machinery Convention, 1928 (No. 26), the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144). It hopes that these developments will also all ensure progress in the application of Convention No. 105.

While welcoming the dialogues under way, particularly in the social dialogue forum, the Committee deplores the continued criminalization of social movements and the expression of views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system, as well as the repeated absence of information from the Government in this regard, which denies the existence of such acts. In the light of the foregoing, the Committee once again strongly urges the Government to take the necessary measures, both in law and practice, to put an immediate end to any violation of the provisions of the Convention by ensuring that no one who, in a peaceful manner, expresses political views or opposes the established political, social or economic system can be sentenced with penalties involving compulsory labour. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide detailed information on the application in practice of the provisions of the Criminal Code, the Basic Act against organized crime and the financing of terrorism, and Act No. 41.274, referred to above, and to specify the number of prosecutions brought on the grounds of these provisions, the nature of the penalties imposed and the acts that led to the legal proceedings or convictions. Lastly, the Committee urges the Government to ensure the immediate release of any person sentenced to imprisonment involving compulsory labour for having, in a peaceful manner, expressed political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system and to provide information on any progress achieved in this matter.

With reference, lastly, to its previous observation, the Committee takes due note of the adoption of the Act on the partial reform of the Basic Code of Military Justice of 17 September 2021, which provides that no civilian may be judged in the ordinary criminal courts and that all cases concerning them must be referred to the ordinary criminal jurisdictions (section 6 of the Act).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes the observations received from the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the Federation of Chambers and Associations of Commerce and Production of Venezuela (FEDECAMARAS) on 31 August 2017. It also notes the observations from the Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (CTV) received on 5 November 2019 and requests the Government to provide its reply to these observations.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing political opinions or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that persons sentenced to a penalty of deprivation of liberty of presidio or prisión are subject to an obligation to work (sections 12 and 15 of the Penal Code) and observed that the following provisions of the Penal Code provide for penalties of prisión, involving compulsory prison labour, for certain forms of behaviour, namely:

• -offending or showing a lack of respect for the President of the Republic or for a number of public authorities (sections 147 and 148);
• -public denigration of the National Assembly, the Supreme Court of Justice, etc. (section 149);
• -offending the honour, reputation or prestige of a member of the National Assembly or a public servant, or of a judicial or a political body (sections 222 and 225); proof of the truth of the facts is not admitted (section 226); and
• -defamation (sections 442 and 444).

Recalling that the Convention prohibits the imposition of work, including prison labour, as a punishment on persons who express political views, the Committee previously noted with deep concern the criminalization of social movements and the expression of political views. It requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the above-mentioned provisions, while ensuring that no one who, in a peaceful manner, expresses political views or opposes the established political, social or economic system can be sentenced to imprisonment, under the terms of which compulsory labour could be imposed.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement, in its report, that no one, and more particularly no business or union leader, has been condemned for peacefully protesting or expressing political views. It adds that there is no legislative provision imposing an obligation to work on convicted persons and that no complaint has been registered in that respect. Convicted persons can voluntarily participate in cultural, sport or socio-productive activities in order to facilitate their social reintegration once released. The Committee notes that the Government refers to several provisions of the Basic Prison Code (Official Gazette No. 6.207 of 28 December 2015), while highlighting that convicted persons can work in areas corresponding to their skills and receive a financial allowance in return for their work. The Government adds that prison labour is a means of social reintegration and is only mandatory when the convicted person intends to reduce the length of his or her custodial sentence and access alternative penalties to imprisonment (sections 60, 63, 65 and 67 of the Code). It notes, nevertheless, that the Government does not provide any information on the application in practice of sections 147 to 149, 222, 225, 226, 442 and 444 of the Penal Code. Furthermore, referring to its previous comments, it recalls that: (i) under the terms of the Basic Prison Code, work by convicted persons is a right but also a duty and, under section 64 of the Code, convicted persons who refuse work or who voluntarily perform it in an inappropriate manner, commit a very serious fault and are liable to the penalties established in the Code; and (ii) pursuant to sections 12 and 15 of the Penal Code referred to above, persons sentenced to a penalty of deprivation of liberty of presidio or prisión are subject to an obligation to work. The Committee also emphasizes that where the national legislation provides for the obligation to work for persons convicted to sentences of imprisonment, as is the case in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela for penalties of presidio and prisión, provisions of the legislation which lay down limits or restrictions on the exercise of certain civil rights or public freedoms, the violation of which may be punished by sentences of imprisonment, have an effect on the application of the Convention. Indeed, persons who do not comply with these limits could be convicted to a sentence of imprisonment and, as a consequence, be subjected to compulsory labour.

The Committee notes that, in its observations, the CTV expresses concern about the recurring cases of persecution for expressing political opinions, highlighting that there has been an increase in criminalization of social protests and expression of political opinions other than those of the governmental party, with the possibility of criminal sentences involving forced or compulsory labour. The CTV adds that there have been numerous cases of persecution of union leaders, some of whom have been prosecuted before military tribunals, and that recently several university rectors and lecturers have also been prosecuted for criticizing the Government. The CTV further refers to an investigation carried out by an NGO, which showed that, in 2018, 387 cases of violation of freedom of expression were registered and 24 persons were imprisoned for publishing, on social networks, opinions criticizing governmental actions or data showing the social, economic and political emergency in the country.

The Committee takes note of the adoption of the Constitutional Law against hatred, for peaceful coexistence and tolerance (Act No. 41.274 of 8 November 2017), and more particularly of section 20 which provides that “anyone who publicly or through any means suitable for public dissemination promotes, fosters or incites hatred, discrimination or violence against a person or a group of persons, by reason of their real or alleged membership to a determined social, ethnic, religious or political group … shall be punished by imprisonment for ten to 20 years.” It notes, that pursuant to section 21 of the Act, the real or supposed membership to a determined political group is an aggravated circumstance for the offence. The Committee notes that several bodies, such as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), have expressed concern regarding the broad, vague and ambiguous nature of the terms mentioned under section 20 of the Act, and highlighted that the declarations issued by the Government indicate that it will be used to persecute the political opposition and criminalize expression of views opposed to the established political system (IACHR, Country report on Venezuela, Situation of human rights in Venezuela, December 2017).

The Committee notes that similar concerns were expressed on the above Act No 41.274 by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in her 2019 report on the situation of human rights in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, who also highlights that successive laws and reforms have facilitated the criminalization of the opposition and of anyone critical of the Government through vague provisions, increased sanctions for acts that are guaranteed by the right of freedom of peaceful assembly and the use of military jurisdiction for civilians. The United Nations High Commissioner further indicates that neither the Office of the Attorney General nor the Ombudsman, nor the Government nor the police provide protection to victims and witnesses of human rights violations, and that the Attorney General has contributed to stigmatizing and discrediting members of the political opposition and those critical of the Government, in violation of the principle of presumption of innocence. Impunity has enabled the recurrence of human rights violations, emboldened perpetrators and side-lined victims (A/HRC/41/18, 9 October 2019, paragraphs 35, 36, 57, 77 and 80). The Committee notes that, in its Resolution adopted in October 2019, the United Nations Human Rights Council strongly condemns the widespread targeted repression and persecution on political grounds in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and urges the Government to immediately release all political prisoners and all other persons arbitrarily deprived of their liberty. The Committee further notes that the United Nations Human Rights Council highlights that the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has decided to open a preliminary examination of the situation in the country to analyse crimes allegedly committed, since at least April 2017, in the context of demonstrations and related political unrest. It further notes that on 30 April 2020, several United Nations human rights experts indicated that they were alarmed at the increasing threats, attacks and charges against journalists as well as criminalization of human rights defenders since the state of health emergency which was declared on 13 March 2020 as a result of the global virus pandemic (OHCHR press release, 30 April 2020).

Lastly, the Committee notes the report of the ILO Commission of Inquiry appointed under article 26 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organisation to examine the observance by the Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela of the Minimum Wage-Fixing Machinery Convention, 1928 (No. 26), the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), of which the ILO Governing Body took note at its 337th Session (GB 337/INS/8, October 2019). It notes more particularly that the ILO Commission of Inquiry observed with concern that: (i) serious criminal charges, criminalized under the Penal Code and the Basic Code of Military Justice, have been brought against employers’ leaders, trade unionists and members of employers’ organizations for the exercise of their activities, such as participation in protest activities, or expression of views on issues directly related to the defence of the interests of employers’ and workers’ organizations; and (ii) their trial by a military court which constitutes serious violations of the exercise of basic civil liberties, such as freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. The Committee notes that the criminal charges imposed as a result of actions carried out during activities of the employers’ and workers’ organizations, which were referred to by the ILO Commission of Inquiry include: causing panic and/or unrest among the population through the dissemination of false information, insulting the sentry and the armed forces, unlawful association, treason, terrorism, resistance and contempt for authority.

The Committee deplores the continued criminalization of social movements and expression of views opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee strongly urges the Government to take the necessary measures, both in law and practice, to put an immediate end to any violation of the provisions of the Convention by ensuring that no one who, in a peaceful manner, expresses political views or opposes the established political, social or economic system can be sentenced to imprisonment, under the terms of which compulsory labour could be imposed. It requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the provisions of the Penal Code, the Basic Code of Military Justice and Act No. 41.274 referred to above, as well as detailed information on court decisions based thereon, with an indication of the facts that gave rise to the convictions and the nature of the sanctions imposed. Lastly, the Committee requests the Government to ensure the immediate release of any person convicted to a prison sentence entailing compulsory prison labour, for peacefully expressing political views or opposing the established political, social or economic system.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the observations received on 26 August 2016 from the Independent Trade Union Alliance (ASI), on 31 August 2016 from the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the Federation of Chambers and Associations of Commerce and Production of Venezuela (FEDECAMARAS), and on 12 September 2016 from the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions (CODESA), the Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (CTV), the General Confederation of Labour (CGT) and the National Union of Workers of Venezuela (UNETE).

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing political opinions or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee previously recalled that, where the national legislation provides for the obligation to work for persons convicted to sentences of imprisonment, the provisions of the legislation which lay down limits or restrictions on the exercise of certain civil rights or public freedoms, the violation of which may be punished by sentences of imprisonment, may have an effect on the application of the Convention. In this context, the Committee notes the information concerning reprisals or the use of repressive power to intimidate or punish persons by reason of their political opinions, the criminalization of legitimate trade union activities and the obstacles encountered by defenders of human rights and trade union rights in exercising their activities in full freedom. It requested the Government to ensure that no one who, in a peaceful manner, expresses political views, opposes the established, political, social or economic system or who participates in a strike can be sentenced to imprisonment, under the terms of which compulsory labour could be imposed, and to provide information on the application of the following provisions of the Penal Code which establish penalties of prisión for certain forms of behaviour:

• -offending or showing a lack of respect for the President of the Republic or for a number of public authorities (sections 147 and 148);
• -public denigration of the National Assembly, the Supreme Court of Justice, etc. (section 149);
• -offending the honour, reputation or prestige of a member of the National Assembly or a public servant, or of a judicial or political body (sections 222 and 225), with proof of the truth of the facts not being admitted (section 226); and
• -defamation (sections 442 and 444).

In its report, the Government indicates that persons who in a peaceful manner express political views or participate in strikes are not sentenced to imprisonment or compulsory labour. It indicates that the prison system develops effective policies intended to transform prisoners and ensure their social integration, within which work is valued and is not an accessory penalty. These policies are intended to ensure that convicts are integrated voluntarily into production units. They are not compelled to work and their integration into these production units amounts to recognition of their good conduct, and is taken into account when applying sentence reductions.

The Committee notes this information. It observes that, under the terms of the new Basic Prison Code, which entered into force in December 2015, work by prisoners is a right and must not by nature constitute a penalty or an obligation. However, it notes that work is also a duty and that, under section 64 of the Code, convicted persons who refuse work or who voluntarily perform it in an inappropriate manner, commit a serious fault and are liable to the penalties established in the Code. The Committee also recalls that, among the sentences of imprisonment envisaged in the Penal Code, the sentences of “presidio” and “prisión” involve the obligation to work (in, respectively, forced labour or work related to the arts and crafts). Only persons convicted to a sentence of “arresto” are excluded from the requirement to work (section 17). The Committee therefore considers that the provisions of the national legislation relating to the issue of work in prison may be interpreted in a contradictory manner in so far as the Penal Code explicitly establishes an obligation to work and the Basic Prison Code specifies that work is not compulsory, but at the same time establishes that any person who refuses work commits a serious fault and is liable to a penalty. The Committee accordingly considers that persons convicted to a sentence of “presidio” or “prisión” could be compelled to work.

The Committee notes that the United Nations Human Rights Committee, which in 2015 examined the application by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, expressed concern at reports that journalists and human rights defenders have been subjected to intimidation, threats and attacks; allegations of the arbitrary arrest of members of the political opposition; provisions and practices which could discourage the expression of critical positions or critical media and social media reporting on matters of public interest, and which could adversely affect the exercise of freedom of expression, including provisions that make defamation and offending or failing to show respect for the President and other senior officials criminal offences (CCPR/C/VEN/CO/4 of 14 August 2015). The Committee also notes that the Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS) emphasized in the report submitted in June 2016 to the OAS Permanent Council that undue restrictions of social protest, the excessive use of force against demonstrators and the criminalization of opponents and dissidents are typical of the Government’s action. He also emphasized that the media are regularly subjected to penal and administrative proceedings. Finally, the Committee recalls that, in the context of its supervision of the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), it expresses concern at the information relating to acts of violence and intimidation against workers’ and employers’ organizations, and the climate in which public freedoms are exercised.

The Committee expresses deep concern at the criminalization of social movements and the expression of political views. In view of the above, the Committee urges the Government to ensure that no person who, in a peaceful manner, expresses political views or opposes the established political, social or economic system can be convicted to a sentence of imprisonment involving the requirement to perform compulsory labour. It also once again requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the provisions of the Penal Code referred to above, with an indication of the number of court rulings issued, the basis for such rulings and the facts behind the convictions.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Article 1(a) and (d) of the Convention. Imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing political opinions or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system or as a punishment for having participated in strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that persons sentenced to a penalty of deprivation of liberty of presidio or prisión are subject to the obligation to work. Only persons sentenced to a penalty of arresto are excluded from the obligation to work (sections 12, 15 and 17 of the Penal Code). Recalling that the Convention prohibits the imposition of work, including prison labour, as a punishment on persons who express political views, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the following provisions of the Penal Code which establish penalties of prisión for certain forms of behaviour:

• -offending or showing a lack of respect for the President of the Republic or for a number of public authorities (sections 147 and 148);
• -public denigration of the National Assembly, the Supreme Court of Justice, etc. (section 149);
• -offending the honour, reputation or prestige of a member of the National Assembly or a public servant, or of a judicial or a political body (sections 222 and 225); proof of the truth of the facts is not admitted (section 226);
• -defamation (sections 442 and 444).

In its report, the Government specifies that under the terms of the Constitution and the Basic Labour Act, in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, labour is considered to be voluntary and free from any coercion. It cannot be required as a disciplinary measure, or a punishment for expressing political opinions as there exist constitutional guarantees in the social, civil and political fields setting forth the rights of citizens. Similarly, forced labour cannot be imposed as a punishment for participating in a strike. Workers may withdraw their labour on condition that they comply with the procedures envisaged in that respect and that they ensure essential and minimum services.

The Committee notes this information. It recalls that, where the national legislation provides for the obligation to work for persons convicted to sentences of imprisonment, as is the case in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela for penalties of presidio and prisión, provisions of the legislation which lay down limits or restrictions on the exercise of certain civil rights or public freedoms, the violation of which may be punished by sentences of imprisonment, have an effect on the application of the Convention. Indeed, persons who do not comply with these limits could be convicted to a sentence of imprisonment and, accordingly, be subjected to compulsory labour.

In this regard, the Committee recalls that it noted that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) had on several occasions expressed concern at the situation with regard to freedom of thought and expression in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and noted information attesting to a trend of acts of reprisal against individuals who express public disapproval of government policies; a trend to take disciplinary, administrative and penal action against the media and journalists; the use of the punitive power of the State to criminalize human rights defenders, judicialize peaceful social protests and bring criminal prosecutions against persons considered by the authorities to be political opponents (OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 54 of 30 December 2009, and OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 5 corr. 1 of 7 March 2011). Similarly, the Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (CTV) referred to several provisions of the national legislation which restrict the exercise of the right to strike and can serve as a basis for criminalizing social protest through high fines as well as sentences of imprisonment against persons who, in the exercise of the right to strike, paralyse the activities of an enterprise. The criminalization of legitimate trade union activities was also a cause for concern for this Committee and the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference in the context of their supervision of the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87).

The Committee observes that, in its latest annual report (2012), the IACHR considered that the situation remained a matter of concern and decided to include the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in Chapter IV of its report devoted to countries whose human rights practices merit special attention. The IACHR recommended that the Government refrain from making reprisals or using the punitive power of the State to intimidate or sanction individuals based on their political opinions, guarantee the conditions necessary for defenders of human rights and trade union rights to be able to engage freely in their activities, and refrain from taking any action or adopting any new legislation that would limit or impede their work.

In view of the above considerations, the Committee once again requests the Government to take all the necessary measures to ensure that no one who, in a peaceful manner, expresses political views, opposes the established political, social or economic system or who participates in a strike can be sentenced to imprisonment, under the terms of which compulsory labour could be imposed. It also requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the provisions of the Penal Code referred to above, as well as copies of court decisions based thereon and an indication of the facts that gave rise to the convictions. Finally, noting that in August 2013 the National Assembly adopted a new Basic Prison Code, which does not yet appear to have been promulgated, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the adoption of this text affects the requirement to work of persons convicted to a sentence of presidio or prisión.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Article 1(a) and (d) of the Convention. Imposition of sentences of imprisonment involving the obligation to work as a punishment for expressing political opinions or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system or as a punishment for having participated in strikes. The Committee notes the comments submitted on 31 August 2011 by the Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (CTV) on the application by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela of a number of Conventions. The Committee observes that the CTV refers to several provisions of the national legislation (the Penal Code and the Framework Act on national security and defence) as restricting the exercise of the right to strike and serving as a basis for criminalizing social protest in the country, and accordingly constituting a form of blackmail and coercion to prevent workers from defending their interests legitimately. According to the union, these provisions can be used to penalize, through high fines as well as sentences of imprisonment, persons who, in the exercise of their right to strike, paralyse the activities of an enterprise.

The Committee observes that, in the context of the supervision of the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), both the Committee of Experts and the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference have expressed concern at the criminalization of legitimate trade union activities, at restrictions on the public freedoms that are necessary for the exercise of trade union rights and at allegations that a climate of intimidation prevails around trade union organizations, employers’ organizations and heads of enterprises that are not sympathetic to the Government.

The Committee notes the report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) entitled “Democracy and human rights in Venezuela” (OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc.54, of 30 December 2009) and its 2010 Annual Report (OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc.5 corr.1, of 7 March 2011), and in particular paragraphs 608–837 covering the situation in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. In its 2009 report, the IACHR examined with concern the situation with regard to freedom of thought and expression in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. It considered that the lack of independence and autonomy of the judicial authorities in relation to the political authorities is a fragile aspect of democracy. It analysed the serious obstacles faced by human rights defenders and it expressed concern at the information attesting to a trend of acts of reprisal against individuals who express public disapproval of Government policies, which affect both opposition bodies and citizens who exercise their right to express their disagreement with the policies adopted. In its 2010 report, the IACHR indicates that this worrying trend has continued and also notes a trend to take disciplinary, administrative and penal action against the media and journalists. The IACHR recommended the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to refrain from carrying out reprisals or using the punitive power of the State to intimidate or sanction individuals on the basis of their political opinions and to guarantee the plurality of spaces for democratic activity, including respect for demonstrations and protests that are carried out in exercise of the right of assembly and peaceful demonstration. In its press releases Nos 36/10 and 61/10, the IACHR also expressed its deep concern at the use of the punitive power of the State to criminalize human rights defenders, judicialize peaceful social protests and bring criminal prosecutions against persons the authorities considered to be political opponents.

The Committee also notes that, in the context of the Universal Periodic Review carried out in October 2011 by the United Nations Human Rights Council, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) stated that the situation with regard to the right to freedom of expression had deteriorated in recent years and referred to a series of provisions of the national legislation that were also likely to restrict the right to freedom of expression (A/HRC/WG.6/12/VEN/2, paragraphs 44 and 46).

The Committee recalls that, under the terms of Article 1(a) and (d) of the Convention, persons who express political views, or who express opposition to the established political, social or economic system, or who participate in a strike, cannot be the subject of sanctions under the terms of which work is imposed upon them. The Committee notes that, under the terms of sections 12 and 15 of the Penal Code, persons sentenced to a penalty of presidio or of prisión are subject to the obligation to work. Only persons sentenced to a penalty of arresto are excluded from the obligation to work (section 17). The Committee draws attention to the following provisions of the Penal Code which establish penalties of prisión for certain forms of behaviour:

• -offending or showing a lack of respect for the President of the Republic or for a number of public authorities (sections 147 and 148);
• -public denigration of the National Assembly, the Supreme Court of Justice, etc. (section 149);
• -offending the honour, reputation or prestige of a member of the National Assembly or a public servant, or of a judicial or political body (sections 222 and 225); proof of the truth of the facts is not admitted (section 226);
• -defamation (sections 242 and 244).

In view of the above, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that no one who expresses political views, who peacefully opposes the established political, social or economic system or who participates peacefully in a strike can be sentenced to imprisonment under the terms of which compulsory labour would be imposed. It also requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the above provisions, with a copy of court decisions based thereon and an indication of the facts that gave rise to the convictions.