August, 01 2024, 11:00am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tel: +44 (0) 20 7413 5566,After hours: +44 7778 472 126,Email:,press@amnesty.org
Venezuela: International organizations condemn the high levels of violence and repression and demand that the authorities guarantee the right to protest and full respect for the rights to life, personal integrity and freedom
In the context of the post-electoral protests in Venezuela and the documented disproportionate use of force by Venezuelan security forces, we, the undersigned organizations, demand respect for and guarantee of the right to freedom of expression, assembly and peaceful protest. We call on the authorities to refrain from criminalizing protest and to comply fully with international standards and norms on the use of force.
The protests in Venezuela take place in a context following the presidential elections held last Sunday, July 28, 2024, whose transparency has been highly questioned by the international community. The Carter Center, one of the two international technical observation missions invited and accredited by the Venezuelan National Electoral Council itself, declared that “the 2024 presidential election in Venezuela did not meet international standards of electoral integrity and cannot be considered democratic”.
State authorities and public security forces must respect the right to protest, the protection of which is an essential element in democracies and a historical tool for claiming rights. It is also a way for citizens to participate in matters of public interest. Likewise, authorities must avoid the use of speeches that encourage and incite violence against people exercising their legitimate right to participate in peaceful demonstrations, as well as avoid stigmatization against civil society organizations.
After the elections and up to the publication of this statement, national organizations have registered at least 11 deaths and have identified the use of lethal weapons by alleged armed civilians linked to the security forces and possible public force. The undersigned organizations condemn the use of this weaponry and recall that in no case can lethal force be used to control demonstrations. According to international standards, the deprivation of the right to life in the context of the use of force by the State would be arbitrary and, in some cases, an extrajudicial execution. These facts must be investigated promptly, independently and impartially and with due diligence.
Thus, the pre-electoral and post-electoral context in Venezuela has been marked by repression and multiple human rights violations, including a serious pattern of politically motivated detentions, potentially unlawful killings, restrictions on freedom of the press, and internet shutdowns. We are particularly concerned about the hundreds of arbitrary detentions after July 28 documented by national organizations, which continue to receive information of new cases and carry out this documentation work in an extremely adverse context.
Furthermore, we are particularly alarmed by the criminalization of the protest and, in particular, by the statements made by Attorney General Tarek William Saab who informed the press that more than 749 people have been arrested in connection with the protests. They are being accused of “violent acts” and will be charged with crimes such as public instigation, obstruction of public roads, instigation to hatred, resistance to authority and, in the most serious cases, terrorism. In addition, they will be sentenced to imprisonment.
We recall that the State of Venezuela is obligated under Article 68 of its Constitution and international law to respect and protect, without discrimination, the rights of all demonstrators, as well as protest observers, bystanders and journalists. The use of force constitutes a violation of this obligation if it does not conform to international standards including the principles of legality, necessity, proportionality, precaution, non-discrimination and accountability. Authorities in Venezuela have an obligation to de-escalate conflict, use non-violent means, use force in a progressive and differentiated manner, and respect the right to political participation through the electoral process.
Taking into account the internet outages documented in the electoral context, we recall that internet access is intimately related to the right to protest as it allows denouncing abuses, communicating in real time and organizing peacefully. Internet blockades affect freedom of expression and access to information, essential for democracy and pluralism. Restrictions on internet access during protest contexts are commonly used as a form of repression and control to limit the ability of the population to mobilize and exercise their rights freely inside and outside the digital space.
It is crucial that all persons be able to freely exercise their right to freedom of expression, assembly and association without fear for their physical integrity and life. Furthermore, Venezuelan authorities must ensure that no one is prosecuted or deprived of liberty for peacefully exercising their rights.
Finally, we call on the international community to demand respect for the civil and political rights of people in Venezuela. We also invite the international justice mechanisms to remain alert to possible serious human rights violations in the context of the protests that have been taking place since July 28 and to include the documentation of such international crimes in the ongoing international justice mechanisms such as the UN Fact-Finding Mission or the International Criminal Court.
Signatory organizations
- Amnesty International
- Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL)
- CIVICUS
- International Commission of Jurists
- Freedom House
- Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
- International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights
- International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT)
- Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)
- World Organization Against Torture (OMCT)
- Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights
For more information or to arrange an interview, please contact press@amnesty.org
Amnesty International is a worldwide movement of people who campaign for internationally recognized human rights for all. Our supporters are outraged by human rights abuses but inspired by hope for a better world - so we work to improve human rights through campaigning and international solidarity. We have more than 2.2 million members and subscribers in more than 150 countries and regions and we coordinate this support to act for justice on a wide range of issues.
LATEST NEWS
'A Good Day for Our Democracy': Judge Orders Trump to End National Guard Deployment in LA
"For more than five months, the Trump administration has held California National Guard troops hostage as part of its political games," said California's attorney general. "But the president is not king."
Dec 10, 2025
In a win for Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom, state Attorney General Rob Bonta, and the residents of Los Angeles, a federal judge on Wednesday ordered President Donald Trump to stop deploying the National Guard in the nation's second-largest city.
"The founders designed our government to be a system of checks and balances," wrote US District Judge Charles Breyer, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton. "Defendants, however, make clear that the only check they want is a blank one."
Trump mobilized around 4,000 California National Guard troops in June amid protests against his violent crackdown on undocumented immigrants. Since then, the Republican leader has also pursued deployments in other Democrat-led cities, including Chicago, Illinois; Portland, Oregon; and Washington, DC, where two soldiers were recently shot.
The new ruling from San Francisco-based Breyer comes as the administration was cutting troops in LA from 300 to 100, according to the New York Times.
"Once again, a court has firmly rejected the president's attempt to make the National Guard a traveling national police force."
"Six months after they first federalized the California National Guard, defendants still retain control of approximately 300 guardsmen, despite no evidence that execution of federal law is impeded in any way—let alone significantly," the judge said. "What's more, defendants have sent California guardsmen into other states, effectively creating a national police force made up of state troops."
After ruling in September that Trump's deployment of Marines in Los Angeles violated the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, the judge on Wednesday blocked the president's federalization of California National Guard troops—but he also halted his own decision until next Monday, allowing for appeals.
Despite the prospect that the Trump administration would continue the court fight, Bonta and Newsom—who is expected to run for president in 2028—welcomed the ruling.
"Once again, a court has firmly rejected the president's attempt to make the National Guard a traveling national police force," Bonta said in a statement. "For more than five months, the Trump administration has held California National Guard troops hostage as part of its political games."
"But the president is not king. And he cannot federalize the National Guard whenever, wherever, and for however long he wants, without justification," the attorney general declared. "This is a good day for our democracy and the strength of the rule of law."
In addition to battling Trump's invasion of LA, Bonta has backed lawsuits filed by Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, and DC Attorney General Brian Schwalb challenging the president's deployments in their cities and filed an amicus brief with the US Supreme Court for the Chicago fight.
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Threatens ICC With More Sanctions to Prevent Future Prosecution of Trump: Report
"Amending the Rome Statute to exclude non-state parties will never happen," said one professor of international law.
Dec 10, 2025
Exclusive reporting by Reuters on Wednesday cites an anonymous government official who says that the Trump administration has privately reached out to the International Criminal Court in order to threaten new sanctions against the ICC unless it pledges not to prosecute President Donald Trump for any crimes he may have committed.
According to the news agency:
The Trump administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Washington has communicated its demands to ICC members, some of whom are U.S. allies, and has also made them known to the court. The United States is not a party to the Rome Statute that established the ICC in 2002 as a court of last resort, with the power to prosecute heads of state.
The demand and the threat to resume the U.S. sanctions campaign towards the court have not been previously reported.
In February, just a month after taking office for his second term, Trump announced US sanctions against ICC officials following the issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli government leaders for their role in the military assault and humanitarian embargo on Gaza, characterized by a United Nations investigative body and numerous human rights groups worldwide as a genocide.
The unnamed official who spoke to Reuters said there "is growing concern" that after Trump leaves office in January of 2029, "the ICC will turn its attention to the president, to the vice president, to the secretary of war and others, and pursue prosecutions against them. That is unacceptable, and we will not allow it to happen."
According to the source, the solution is for ICC members states "to change the Rome Statute to make very clear that they don't have jurisdiction" over US heads of state, including Trump, for any possible crime no matter its nature or where it takes place.
As Reuters notes, "Enshrining blanket immunity for specific individuals would be seen as undermining the court's founding principles and would need approval by the court's governing body, the Assembly of States Parties."
Kevin Jon Heller, a professor international law as the University of Copenhagen and a special adviser to the ICC Prosecutor on War Crimes, said in a social media post Wednesday that it is highly unlikely that member states would bow to the US pressure. "Amending the Rome Statute to exclude non-state parties will never happen," said Heller.
The official did not say which acts of the president have caused the most worry within the administration as it concerns a possible prosecution.
During his second term Trump has—among other possible crimes and violations of international law—ordered the bombing of Iran, unleashed numerous strikes against Somalia and Yemen that have resulted in civilian casualties, provided political support and armed Israel as it carries out a genocide in Gaza, and conducted, since September, a series of extrajudicial murders in the Caribbean and Pacific with aerial bombings that have claimed the lives of at least 87 people.
Reuters reports Friday that it was told by two ICC deputy prosecutors that they had not received any requests to investigate US actions regarding Venezuela.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senate GOP Healthcare Plan Decried as ‘Utter Joke’ That Would Devastate Sick Americans
One campaigner said Republicans want to force people "onto junk plans that leave them at risk of crippling medical debt."
Dec 10, 2025
The Republican healthcare proposal that's set for a vote in the US Senate on Thursday would not prevent insurance premiums from skyrocketing for tens of millions of Americans and would likely harm sicker people by promoting high-deductible plans.
The GOP bill, led by Sens. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.), would allow enhanced Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits to expire, replacing them in 2026 and 2027 with an annual payment of up to $1,500 in tax-advantaged health savings accounts to help cover out-of-pocket costs.
The catch is that only Americans enrolled in high-deductible bronze or catastrophic plans on the ACA exchanges would be eligible for the funding, which could not be used on monthly premiums. In 2026, the average individual deductible for bronze plans is $7,476, and the average for catastrophic plans is $10,600.
Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF, said Tuesday that "premium payments would still more than double next year" under the GOP plan, which does not have enough support to overcome the Senate's 60-vote filibuster.
"Healthy people could be better off in a high deductible plan with a health savings account," Levitt noted. "People who are sick would face big premium increases or a deductible they can't afford."
Brad Woodhouse, president of the advocacy group Protect Our Care, called Senate Republicans' legislation "an utter joke that would set healthcare progress back by decades and leave Americans high and dry without the care and coverage they deserve."
"Republicans are proving once again how unserious they are," said Woodhouse. "Instead of protecting hard-working families, Sens. Cassidy and Crapo want to force them off the insurance plans they like and onto junk plans that leave them at risk of crippling medical debt. That’s not what American families want, and it’s certainly not what they deserve.”
Asked earlier this week if he supports the Crapo-Cassidy bill, President Donald Trump responded, "I like the concept."
The Senate GOP plan was introduced as a counter to Democrats' push for a clean three-year extension of the enhanced ACA subsidies. Republicans, who passed legislation over the summer that enacted the largest-ever cuts to Medicaid, are expected to vote down the Democratic plan on Thursday.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that if the ACA tax credits lapse at the end of the year, "a couple making $44,000 (208% of the poverty level) will see their monthly marketplace premium rise from $85 to $253—an annual increase of $2,013."
With the Senate vote looming, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La) is "still trying to figure out" his healthcare proposal, Politico reported Tuesday.
"The goal is for GOP lawmakers to have 'something' to vote on before the end of next week, according to one of the senior House Republicans involved in the talks," the outlet added, "even if there is no time left for the Senate to pass it before the subsidies lapse."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


