Experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Commend Venezuela on its Committee to Combat Racial Discrimination, Raise Questions on the Dismissal of Three Indigenous Parliamentarians and Measures to Promote the Rights of People of African Descent
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined twenty-second to twenty-fourth periodic report of Venezuela. Committee Experts commended the State party for progress made by its committee that combatted racial discrimination, while raising questions about the dismissal of three indigenous parliamentarians and measures to promote the rights of people of African descent.
A Committee Expert commended the State party on progress made by Venezuela’s committee that combatted racial discrimination, while asking questions about its budget.
Diaby Bakari Sidiki, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked about the three indigenous persons elected and then deprived of their responsibilities. Were new elections then organised? What were the grounds of the irregularities; was it fraud, or something about the electoral mechanism? Abderrahman Tlemçani, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked for more information to be provided on the three members of parliament who were deprived of their seats? How was this handled? How were the positions filled?
Mr. Tlemçani also asked what concrete actions had been taken by the Venezuelan Government to address multiple and intersectional discrimination against people of African descent? Was there any collaboration with civil society organizations to combat racial discrimination and promote the rights of people of African descent? What constitutional or legislative changes had been proposed to strengthen the recognition of the rights of people of African descent?
The delegation said the suspension of the three indigenous persons was related to measures of fraud, including “vote buying” by these candidates. The dismissal of these representatives transpired during the 2015-2020 term, and the parliament was now in a different term. There had been many complaints which had triggered the investigation. Only indigenous peoples could elect indigenous representatives.
The delegation also said social policies were cross-cutting and did not discriminate. The plan for Afro Venezuelans was accessible online and outlined all the actions planned for the coming years. One of the greatest challenges of this community was self-identification. A centre for African “Know-How” was created in 2011 and organised activities, including lectures and workshops. This centre had gone beyond African borders and joined universities in Cuba and Haiti.
Introducing the report, Clara Vidal, Minister of Popular Power for Indigenous Peoples of Venezuela and head of the delegation, said Venezuela was a democratic, social State, which was multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual, and aimed to include sectors which had historically been excluded. Indigenous peoples, migrants and Afro descendants had been able to prosper within the country. Venezuela had a strong framework of State policies and organic laws to protect specific groups. The legislative framework ensured that indigenous women were rights holders and efforts were being made to guarantee them the full exercise of their civil and political rights, to access justice, their economic, social and cultural rights, and their right to live a life free of violence.
In concluding remarks, Mr. Bakari Sidiki said it had been a fruitful dialogue; while there had been differences in opinion, this was proof of the vitality of the treaty body system. The Committee remained concerned about allegations of intimidation and reprisals, and would pay close attention to further developments. At the same time, the Committee was reassured by the solemn commitment of the delegation to protect human rights defenders.
In her concluding remarks, Ms. Vidal said the delegation was committed to implementing all recommendations of the Committee resulting from the submission of the report. She thanked the Committee for the dialogue and for their time. Venezuela was committed to providing the true situation on the ground and firmly stood against racial discrimination.
The delegation of Venezuela consisted of representatives of the Ministry of Popular Power for Indigenous Peoples; Ministry of Popular Power for Foreign Affairs; Ministry of Popular Power for Internal Relations; Ministry of Popular Power for Women and Gender Equality; the Ministry for Multilateral Issues; the Supreme Court of Justice; the National Assembly; the National Human Rights Council; the Public Ministry; the International System of Human Rights; and the Permanent Mission of the Bolivian Republic of Venezuela to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here. The programme of work of the Committee’s one hundred and thirteenth session and other documents related to the session can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public on Wednesday, 7 August, at 3 p.m. to begin its consideration of the combined twentieth to twenty-seventh periodic report of Iran (CERD/C/IRN/20-27).
Report
The Committee has before it the combined twenty-second to twenty-fourth periodic report of Venezuela (CERD/C/VEN/22-24).
Presentation of Report
CLARA VIDAL, Minister of Popular Power for Indigenous Peoples of Venezuela and head of the delegation, said Venezuela was a democratic, social State, which was multiethnic, multicultural and multilingual, and aimed to include sectors which had historically been excluded. Indigenous peoples, migrants and Afro descendants had been able to prosper within the country. Venezuela practiced a participative democracy. In political and social life, women, indigenous peoples and Afro descendants had contributed to the road to democracy. The democratic model promoted the coexistence and rights of all, regardless of their roots and cultures. This was defined in the current plan of the nation and the proposal of the new national strategic plan 2025. However, progress had been hindered by the illegal and unjust unilateral coercive measures applied by the United States of North America, the European Union and others.
For the next government plan 2025-2031, strategies were in place, with seven proposals for recovery. These included the strengthening of the economic productive forces and the deployment of a new export model, as well as the preparation of the comprehensive climate emergency plan in the Venezuelan Amazon, among others. These seven proposals would revive the sustained recovery of the economy which had been besieged with constant criminal unilateral, discrimination through 930 barbaric coercive measures. Venezuela requested that these be lifted.
Venezuela had a strong framework of State policies and organic laws to protect specific groups. The legislative framework ensured that indigenous women were rights holders and efforts were being made to guarantee them the full exercise of their civil and political rights, to access justice, their economic, social and cultural rights, and their right to live a life free of violence. The law on inclusion enabled indigenous and Afro-descendant people to establish their own destiny, in strict respect of the participatory democracy constitution of Venezuela.
The National Armed Forces governed their actions by recognising the existence of indigenous communities as well as their land, language, customs and rights. All military officials conducted their activities with no discrimination and without undermining the rights of indigenous communities. The Venezuelan Government aimed to overcome racial discrimination with the creation of the National Council for the Development of the Afro descendant Communities of Venezuela.
Questions by Committee Experts
DIABY BAKARI SIDIKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said he was the Committee’s focal point for cases of reprisals. Worrying information had been received regarding the safety of human rights defenders, including allegations of reprisals against civil society cooperating with the Committee. The Committee had a zero-tolerance policy on acts of intimidation, and invited Venezuela to commit itself to protect all human rights defenders.
Since the approval of the State Constitution in 1999, Venezuelan society had undergone significant social transformations that had led to the greater inclusion of indigenous peoples and vulnerable groups in the public sphere. Despite progress, structural barriers remained in Venezuela, preventing indigenous and Afro descendant peoples from enjoying their rights on an equal footing. It was essential to strengthen accountability, to increase budget allocations for prevention, and to effectively implement mechanisms aimed at combatting racial discrimination.
According to the State party's report, the 2011 national Census showed that the total population of Venezuela was 27,227,930 and was expected to reach 32,605,423 in 2020. Questions concerning ethnic self-identification were introduced in the context of this Census. Could information be provided on the difference between Venezuelans of African descent and black Venezuelans? What mechanisms had been implemented to receive, monitor and register complaints for crimes of racism and discrimination? How was it ensured that accused indigenous persons had appropriate legal defence from those with appropriate cultural expertise?
It was reported to the Committee that there were regular punitive expeditions of the armed forces in the Venezuelan Amazon, causing many victims, including indigenous leaders and people of African descent. Had there been steps taken to investigate allegations of abuse? How many awareness campaigns had been carried out for the benefit of public security agents? Could the delegation provide information relating to the interference of the judiciary in the work of the parliament and executive? Three elected indigenous representatives had allegedly been stripped of their legislative mandate and replaced by unelected parliamentarians; what was being done to rehabilitate them?
How had the Homeland Plan 2019-2025 contributed to improving the enjoyment of the social, economic and cultural rights of indigenous persons and persons of African descent? Could concrete examples, including statistics be provided? Had the national human rights plan been evaluated? What was its impact on the fight against discrimination? Had there been an increase in the number of complaints? How many judicial proceedings had been started to combat hate speech?
The Ombudsman’s Office had been accredited A status but was then demoted to a B status in 2016. What measures had been taken to ensure that members of the Ombudsman’s Office could express themselves in an effective and impartial manner? What was the reason behind the low number of complaints received? What corrective measures had been adopted? Had the Ombudsman’s Office been working with the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to improve its ranking?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the most recent elections of the National Assembly took place in December 2020 and the term of the representatives would end in 2025. Members of Parliament currently sitting at the National Assembly were democratically elected.
The National Language Institute for Indigenous Languages worked under the Ministry of Popular Education. It was a centralised academic body with a legal standing. Its goal was to enforce public policies and activities to ensure the preservation of indigenous languages. It was compulsory to teach indigenous languages in schools. Twelve different cultural hubs had been created around the country to spread the cultural and linguistic identity of indigenous peoples. The law against neo-fascism sought to protect constitutional provisions in the country and promote the importance of human rights.
A recent reform to the law on racial discrimination prohibited any act of racial discrimination, aligning the State fully with the Convention. It also included contexts like ethno-racism. Venezuela had recently criminalised racial discrimination, which had been a longstanding recommendation of the Committee. The law on hate speech prohibited any kinds of propaganda or messages in favour of war. The law also criminalised the crime of promoting the incitement to hatred. The recommendation to adopt these laws was part of the previous concluding observations provided by the Committee. Overall, the entire legal architecture established by Venezuela over the last four-year period had cross-cutting principles of equality and non-discrimination. The law on families contained a specific chapter on the protection of indigenous peoples and their communities.
Most of the indigenous population in Venezuela lived in the state of Zulia, where more than 60 per cent of the population were indigenous. The Homeland Plan 2019-2025 contained a sectoral project devoted to indigenous peoples and communities, which had been drafted with their assistance. Over two months of meetings and assemblies had been held to ensure the proper implementation of the plan. Forty-two different offices had been launched to provide assistance to indigenous peoples; 112 linguistic hubs had been created within the country; and there were 1,000 intercultural schools to provide education to indigenous children. These measures guaranteed the preservation and growth of indigenous languages.
Indigenous peoples had a right to participate politically in Venezuela. There were three indigenous representatives in the National Assembly. Representatives of the indigenous peoples were elected only by the indigenous population. The Office of the Ombudsman could receive complaints on racial discrimination. The 12 complaints the Office had received were related to violations of the rights of freedom of religion or belief of indigenous peoples or people of African descent. Venezuela had specialised public defenders who worked on indigenous affairs. To gain this position, these defenders had to be familiar and well versed in the indigenous languages.
The assessment of the human rights plan in 2020 found that 93 per cent of the 213 actions included in the plan had been completely or partially implemented by the relevant institutions. The Office of the Ombudsman had been working with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, as well as the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees.
The Supreme Court of Justice had decided to suspend the appointment of a group of indigenous representatives who were elected during parliamentary elections due to supposed irregularities which tainted the results. Regrettably the National Parliament had gone against the ruling of the Supreme Court of Justice.
Questions by Committee Experts
DIABY BAKARI SIDIKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked about the three indigenous persons elected and then deprived of their responsibilities. Were new elections then organised? What were the grounds of the irregularities; was it fraud, or something about the electoral mechanism? What were the measures adopted to make the necessary changes to align the Ombudsman’s Office with the Paris Principles? Had there been no complaints related to racial discrimination? Could everyone benefit from legal aid, including those already in the prison system? What percentage of indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples were in prison? Had the military expeditions against indigenous peoples been investigated? What kinds of reparations had been provided?
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, said information raised as part of the follow-up procedure had been provided now but it had not been provided within the one-year period which had been requested. The Committee had requested that an investigation be conducted against the violent attacks against the Yanomami people; this had not been dealt with at all. Venezuela had been requested to provide the Committee with information on cases of racial discrimination which had been investigated and penalties imposed. The Committee had not received this information. Could more information be provided?
A Committee Expert said it had been 11 years since the last dialogue. Regarding the law on neo-fascism, there were many concerns expressed, including from the High Commissioner of Human Rights. Could the delegation explain if measures had been taken following these concerns, to better formulate the definitions of the law? Could they comment on the law? Hate speech should never be a tool to suppress democracy.
Another Expert said the National Assembly had not respected some Supreme Court decisions. How was the State party intending to resolve this problem? The Committee commended the State party on progress made by Venezuela’s committee that combatted racial discrimination. More than 192 million bolivars had been devoted to its budget. Had this budget increased and was it sufficient?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the Government had provided for better social protection through the Amazon region to ensure the protection of indigenous peoples. There had been a focus on health care and health programmes. The programmes also trained agents from the Yanomami indigenous communities on healthcare, prevention and treatment. A project was being conducted through the armed forces to destroy illegal mining activities which had been affecting the livelihoods of the Yanomami peoples.
Venezuela was committed to protecting the work of civil society and non-governmental organizations. The State recognised all the work being done by these people in Venezuela. The suspension of the three indigenous persons was related to measures of fraud, including “vote buying” by these candidates. In 2020, a new parliament was elected within the National Assembly. Any indigenous person detained in Venezuela had a right to legal assistance and representation by indigenous legal counsel. The law on hatred spoke volumes on Venezuela’s commitment to the Convention, declaring any organization promoting discrimination to be unlawful.
There were three general units which prosecuted and investigated crimes of discrimination against persons belonging to vulnerable groups, including on grounds of race and religion. There had been 59 cases of persons sentenced for crimes of hatred or incitement to hatred. There were two special prosecution services within the human rights unit specialising in gender issues and indigenous peoples. Since 2022, progress had been made in eradicating crimes on the ground of gender identity. There had been 14 arrests and eight charges.
The National Institute against Racial Discrimination had been established. Activities carried out by the Institute included investigations and the first national consultation on racial discrimination. A diploma course on racial discrimination in Venezuela had been created. Peace hubs had been established to analyse cultural spaces and speak about racism. More than 1,700 legal aid places had been created to assist those who identified as members of the Afro descendant community; 7.1 per cent of the prison population self-identified as Afro descendants and 2.1 per cent of the prison population were indigenous persons.
Questions by Committee Experts
ABDERRAHMAN TLEMÇANI, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked how the principle of self-identification was integrated into the data collection process during the last Census? Were there significant disparities in socio-economic indicators between indigenous peoples, people of African descent and the rest of the Venezuelan population? What measures were taken to ensure the accuracy of the data collected?
What were the main measures currently in place to prevent the dissemination of messages promoting racial stereotypes and prejudices against indigenous peoples and people of African descent in the public media? How did the public media promote a positive and equitable image of indigenous peoples and people of African descent? What roles did influencers and opinion leaders play on social networks in the fight against racial stereotypes and prejudices?
What were the main causes for the internal displacement of indigenous peoples and people of African descent? What could the authorities do to protect these people from threats of violence or exploitation which often caused internal displacement? How could the Government promote the economic development of indigenous and African communities without compromising their rights and culture?
What actions were being taken to protect the water resources and ecosystems of the areas where the Wayúu lived, and how did these actions contribute to the fight against climate change? How could traditional knowledge and cultural practices of the Wayúu be integrated into climate change adaptation strategies? What economic support policies were in place to help Wayúu communities diversify their sources of income and reduce their economic vulnerability due to climate change?
How did political parties integrate indigenous issues and representatives into their platforms and structures? Could more information be provided on the three members of parliament who were deprived of their seats? How was this handled? How were the positions filled?
What were the main provisions of the law on indigenous languages? What was the main goal of this law? Were indigenous communities involved in the development and implementation of this law?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the dismissal of the three indigenous representatives transpired during the 2015-2020 term, and the parliament was now in a different term. There had been many complaints which had triggered the investigation. Only indigenous peoples could elect indigenous representatives. Members of each community choose their representatives. There were over 21 indigenous organizations in Venezuela which helped representatives of indigenous peoples to run and be elected. The Institute of Indigenous Languages aimed to work with indigenous peoples in their communities to broaden their study of their languages.
The content of the media did not always promote tolerance and acceptance. When it came to mainstreaming cultural policies, the Ministry of Culture was raising the barrier high by focusing on Afro descendants. The State was meeting the challenge of new technologies and ensuring greater integration and tolerance in this regard.
Venezuela had seen the active participation of indigenous communities on climate policies and had built in the recognition of natural and ancestral knowledge. Indigenous communities benefitted from prior and informed consent. There were climate change brigades, comprised of more than 50,000 young people from Afro and indigenous communities, raising awareness about climate change. Around 450 water collection systems had been put in place to promote sustainable water use. Venezuela wanted to protect the State and indigenous peoples and ensure they could live in their own territories. It was essential to ensure indigenous communities were well organised.
The unilateral coercive measures imposed against Venezuela had been condemned by many, including the High Commissioner for Human Rights and United Nations mandate holders. The country had been beset by more than 930 such measures. This had resulted in the national budget being reduced by 99 per cent. As a result of the unilateral coercive measures, adopted by the Government of the United States, Venezuela had gone from enjoying oil exports worth 50 billion dollars per year to oil exports of 750 million dollars per year. The country had survived but there had been drastic impacts on the Venezuelan people. The country was using its own resources to overcome the measures and recover the State’s social policy.
It was important to pay tribute to the work carried out by indigenous peoples across the 600 areas in Venezuela where they lived. There were 52 different indigenous peoples in the country. There was no doubt that unilateral coercive measures had impacted these people.
Questions by Committee Experts
ABDERRAHMAN TLEMÇANI, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked why indigenous peoples had to cross the border into Colombia to receive education?
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, asked for information on the investigations conducted regarding attacks by illegal miners against the Yanomami people?
DIABY BAKARI SIDIKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked about the militarisation of the land and territories of indigenous peoples. There had been heavy duty attacks by armed forces. Could the delegation provide an explanation? Could information on racial profiling be provided?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said there was no border between Columbia and Venezuela, so the Wayúu people lived on both sides of the border. Education and health were guaranteed to indigenous peoples in Venezuela, regardless of what side of the border they lived on.
A case was being investigated regarding attacks on the Yanomami people. Three deaths had allegedly occurred, but this was not confirmed and the case was under investigation.
The delegation said post graduate students could take human rights courses, as well as a course on gender equality. The State wanted to focus on increased training for law enforcement officials. Administrative sanctions were provided for officials who committed violations. There were victim units in every police unit.
Policies were in place which ensured each local community had the right to its own territory and its members were appropriately cared for. State policy ensured inter-cultural, bilingual education. There were indigenous health units and women’s centres in places where indigenous peoples lived. There was appropriate care for indigenous peoples in Venezuela.
An organic law was in place which recognised the role of the police in recognising discrimination on the grounds of ethnic origin. There was no racial profiling in Venezuela. In conjunction with the Ministry for Indigenous Peoples, indigenous peoples were permitted to join the police force, ensuring there were staff who fully understood indigenous laws.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert said political borders were colonial constructs, carried out by modern States. Was it correct that the indigenous peoples living in the border communities moved freely back and forth, and that this was accepted by the countries which they crossed?
DIABY BAKARI SIDIKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said police should be called in to restore order to the country when there was an issue. Why had the armed forces been called in instead when there was a public order disruption due to indigenous peoples’ actions? Was there any mechanism to address abuse perpetrated in this case? Were there indigenous peoples and people of African descent in the armed forces? How were these peoples represented in government and parliament? Could these peoples use their own languages if they wanted to lodge an action or defend themselves against institutions?
Another Expert asked how the issue of non-compliance by the National Assembly, regarding the decision of the Supreme Court, would be addressed?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said Venezuela had constant, cross-cutting training courses offered to the police forces. A specialised master’s degree had been approved on human rights, equality and fairness. Venezuela had offices to provide care for victims within the municipal security forces. If there was improper action by the police, there could be criminal sanctions and investigations. Self-identification was one of the greatest challenges in Venezuela.
In 2020, there were elections for the National Assembly and in 2021, a new National Assembly was established which was currently seating. Venezuela now had a national parliament that was committed to human rights. During the legislative term, the Government had approved 79 laws. These all had articles addressing gender equality and non-discrimination. The State had managed to build five million households and would build three million more in the next seven years. They were using architectural features which were mindful of the way indigenous communities lived. No law was approved without going through nationwide consultation.
Venezuela respected the right to self-determination of all its peoples. Indigenous peoples had broad rights and were able to access services. The presence of the armed forces on indigenous grounds was due to the strategic position of the land and did not impact on the rights of the indigenous peoples.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert said the Committee was watchful and vigilant regarding the fate of human rights defenders. It was hoped the message for respect for human rights defenders reached all levels of law enforcement and government. Unfortunately, a person was detained at the airport and was not permitted to travel to attend the meeting of the Committee. Could an explanation be provided? The Committee appreciated the State’s assurance of the safety of human rights defenders.
DIABY BAKARI SIDIKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said the Committee would appreciate detailed information on the steps taken by Venezuela to adopt a framework law for consultations with indigenous nations and peoples so that they could decide whether or not to grant their free, prior and informed consent. Was there a mechanism to harmonise consultation processes with current international standards on free, prior and informed consent? How did Venezuela plan to assess the possibility of incorporating prior consultation to obtain free, prior and informed consent in mining operations which may affect the rights of indigenous peoples?
What was the policy of recognition of collective rights to territories inhabited by indigenous peoples and people of African descent? What measures were available to guarantee legal certainty for indigenous peoples with regard to their lands and resources? Gold mining affected the lands and waters of territories inhabited by indigenous peoples and people of African descent. What measures to reduce pollution had been envisaged? How was traditional medicine integrated into the national health development plan?
It had been reported to the Committee that more than five million Venezuelans, including indigenous peoples and people of African descent, were excluded from the electoral list. How did the State plan to reintegrate these peoples on the electoral list so that they could enjoy their right to vote and the possibility of being elected? What measures had been undertaken to improve the quality of education, both in rural and urban areas, to further reduce the educational gap between indigenous and Afro-Venezuelan children and others? What was Venezuela doing to ensure suitable health care was available in indigenous health care centres?
What measures had been adopted in the context of intercultural and multilingual education? How did the State aim to strengthen teacher training in inclusive education? How was data being compiled on employment? How did Venezuela plan to gather information on the school dropout rates caused by the COVID-19 pandemic?
What measures were being taken to ensure that recognised refugees had effective access to documents? How did the State intend to adopt measures to ensure that undocumented refugees could effectively benefit from protection? It was reported to the Committee that to obtain a refugee identity card, refugees must first obtain a temporary visa, for which a valid national passport was required. Temporary visas were issued for one year renewable and cost around USD 1,500. For the first application, visas and refugee identity cards were issued only in the capital Caracas, adding additional costs to a refugee’s identity documents. What measures were envisaged to definitively resolve this situation? Why were illegal foreign nationals kept in administrative detention under the jurisdiction of the migration authorities pending a removal procedure? How did the State intend to address the issue of refoulement?
The Committee welcomed the measures taken by Venezuela to ensure universal birth registration, including the constitutional rights to identity and nationality, the law on the national civil registry office (2009), and decree no. 2890 (2009), which guaranteed the registration of births of children born in the territory to undocumented parents. Despite the progress made, many people whose births had not been registered still faced barriers to effective access to late birth registration procedures, particularly among rural and indigenous adult populations. When did the State plan to carry out a general population and housing census to update the statistical data?
In its 2023 participatory evaluation of 63 communities, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees found that 80 per cent of the communities assessed had unregistered children. What measures were being considered by the State to provide a sustainable response? What was the estimated number of stateless people or people at risk of statelessness in Venezuela? Would the State adopt a national plan for the eradication of statelessness by 2024 aligned with the global plan for the elimination of statelessness? As the first Decade for People of African Descent was ending, what initiatives had been undertaken by the State to mark this decade? What initiatives were envisaged for the second decade?
The Committee had been informed that four Yanomami people had been murdered and no bodies had been found. This group did not bury their dead but incinerated them. Taking this into account, had the investigations gone further?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the demarcation of land of indigenous peoples was a big topic in Venezuela. Since the process had begun, 62 titles had been granted and more than 21,000 families had benefitted from this. A committee was in charge of visiting the communities and drafting anthropological documents and technical reports. No commissioner was authorised to push through a procedure without consent from indigenous peoples. After the reports were drafted with consent from indigenous peoples, they were presented to the Government to begin the demarcation process. The demarcation process had been one of a kind in Venezuela. The State had seen so much progress, they could now speak about a demarcation era.
The Constitution ensured the right of free, prior and informed consent for each of the projects which affected indigenous peoples and their communities. In the law concerning indigenous peoples, there were several articles which promoted consultation with indigenous peoples, including local authority councils. No projects could see the light of day in indigenous territories without consultation with communities. Venezuela was currently working on a protocol for prior and informed consent to ensure it could be used as a guide. In the mining basin, nobody could enter without the approval of indigenous communities. There were many different examples of prior and informed consent relating to mining basins throughout Venezuela.
Venezuela had an organic law on refugees and asylum, which lay down the requirements as to what needed to be met to grant refugee status to applicants. Over the past 75 years, there had been many requests for refugee status, mainly due to the conflict in Colombia. De facto protection was offered in this case. Asylum applicants could approach the National Committee for Refugees which triggered the process for issuing documentation to applicants. While the National Committee was making their decision, a temporary document was issued which allowed any asylum seeker to have access to employment and receive services, including a bank account. For refugee status to be granted, a preliminary visa needed to be issued and the laminated identity papers would be provided.
Venezuela had a policy of providing students with free technological devices, including computers and tablets. Around 6.5 million of these devices had been distributed to students within the education system, all the way through to university. This programme had been impacted by the unilateral coercive measures. In 2003, the unemployment rate in Venezuela was 16.8 per cent and in 2022, it was 7.8 per cent, a drop of more than nine percentage points.
Questions by Committee Experts
DIABY BAKARI SIDIKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked for more details regarding the demarcation of indigenous territories. How many applications for land demarcation had been submitted? How many had been granted and how many were still underway? For those that had been rejected, what were the reasons for the rejection? The Committee was pleased to hear about the National Committee for Refugees. Was there an appeal process for those applicants whose applications were rejected? Could any applicant be given a second chance? What measures were being taken to protect the health of local populations in communities exposed to gold mining? Had any investigations been conducted into intimidation and reprisals against human rights defenders?
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, said the Committee had recommended that the State party should conduct thorough investigations into the situation of the Yukpa people and put perpetrators on trial. Could information be provided in this regard?
A Committee Expert said the COVID-19 pandemic had further stretched the already weakening health system in Venezuela. It was reported that those in remote areas did not have access to health services unless they travelled one to two days by boat or on foot. It was reported that a Venezuelan woman needed more than 15 times the monthly salary to buy contraception pills, while abortion was still illegal. What measures were being taken to increase and improve the access of indigenous persons to timely and quality health services and sexual and reproductive services?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said in January 2024, care had been provided to 2,164 indigenous women and more than 25,000 women of African descent. The State had planned birthing programmes and maternal breast feeding programmes. There were specific units for indigenous peoples and training programmes which ensured support for breast feeding and health services for newborns. The State respected the rights, cultures and traditions of indigenous communities. Abortion was not permitted by law in Venezuela. Significant discussion had been held with women’s organizations on this topic, but no specific outcome had resulted.
A law on the electoral process laid down all requirements to ensure a Venezuelan living abroad could vote within the country. Those who had permanent residency in the country where they resided could register in that country and take part in elections. As a result of the political decision taken by some States not to recognise the Venezuelan authorities, there was a lack of protection for Venezuelans living in those specific countries. An office was working with the United Nations Children’s Fund to try and prevent statelessness. Due to the unilateral coercive measures, there had been a drop in the availability of medication in the country by more than 70 per cent.
The Yukpa people lived on Venezuelan territory and in the neighbouring territory in Colombia. Hubs had been set up to provide social assistance and food for these communities. There was a register of more than 2,500 artisans in this area. There had been an indigenous identity card centre since November 2023. In January, over 6,000 identity cards had been granted to Yukpa representatives on “Open Doors Day”. Venezuela ensured the right to identity. The indigenous identity card highlighted the indigenous community to which the individual belonged to.
Refugee seekers had the right to appeal in the case an application was rejected. The refugee court or committee would consider the application. All refugee procedures were free of charge. In 2018, the President signed a decree which approved a plan of action for the implementation of measures for the Decade of People of African Descent. August 31 was declared as the National Day of People of African Descent. The indigenous communities participated in assemblies to ensure there was free, prior and informed consent.
Questions by Committee Experts
ABDERRAHMAN TLEMÇANI, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked if people of African descent faced multiple and intersectional discrimination in Venezuela? How did this discrimination affect their access to education, health care and other essential services? What measures were in place to identify and address these forms of discrimination at local and national levels? What public policies had been implemented to promote the rights of people of African descent in Venezuela?
How were these policies evaluated and what monitoring mechanisms existed to ensure their effectiveness? Were there any specific initiatives to promote the economic and social inclusion of people of African descent? What were the main successes and challenges encountered in the implementation of these policies?
What forms of multiple and intersectional discrimination specifically affected indigenous and Afro descendant women in Venezuela? How did this impact their political participation and access to education and health care? Were there specific programmes or initiatives to support these women? What measures had been taken to address impunity for perpetrators of violence, including sexual violence, against indigenous and Afro-descendant women and girls, especially by informal armed groups? How were the authorities ensuring that victims received justice and reparation? Were there psychological and social support programmes available for victims of violence?
What concrete actions had been taken by the Venezuelan Government to address multiple and intersectional discrimination against people of African descent?
What initiatives were in place to collect data on the multiple and intersectional discrimination experienced by people of African descent? Was there any collaboration with civil society organizations to combat racial discrimination and promote the rights of people of African descent? What constitutional or legislative changes had been proposed to strengthen the recognition of the rights of people of African descent? What initiatives had been put in place to encourage the political participation of people of African descent in Venezuela? Were there specific programmes to prepare people of African descent for political leadership roles?
The National Council for the Development of Communities of African Descent in Venezuela was an institution created in March 2012 by presidential decree, with the aim of strengthening national measures and regional and international cooperation in favour of people of African descent. What were the main functions and responsibilities of the Council since its creation in 2012? What types of programmes and projects had the Council put in place to support communities of people of African descent? What specific policies had it adopted to improve access to education, employment and health care for people of African descent? How did the Council support women of African descent, especially in the fight against violence and discrimination? What were the main challenges faced by the Council in the implementation of its policies and programmes, and how did the institution plan to overcome them?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said indigenous peoples had a right to vote in elections at all levels. There was a full participation of indigenous peoples through the electoral process. Indigenous peoples voted within their own communities for their own representatives and in local, regional and national elections.
More than 1,700 Afro descendent women had been trained as community defenders. Venezuela’s National Assembly, the utmost legislative body, had 24 elected indigenous representatives. In 2024, 627 indigenous students had been trained in robotics. A programme was being implemented focusing on mining for women. More than 400 indigenous women had been trained on environmental sustainability. Since 2017, an early pregnancy prevention programme had been in place.
Eradicating violence against women and ensuring gender justice was a great priority. There was a need to strengthen the justice system to ensure it was more women focused. Legal and psychological support had been provided to more than 12,000 women as well as safehouses, training and other initiatives. The Ministry for Women had an Ombudsman service for women’s rights, which had benefitted 22 indigenous women this year.
The Supreme Court of Justice had delivered sentences to recognise the Court of Justice of Indigenous Peoples. The State must also ensure that the justice handed down by these courts should not run counter to human rights laws which were enshrined in the Constitution. As part of the system to protect indigenous communities, there were indigenous women who were involved with the authorities to deal with violence within their communities. A translation of the law promoting women’s right to live a life free from violence had been translated into indigenous languages. Specialised courts and staff had been trained in gender affairs. The number of mobile courts had also been increased to hear cases in the various communities. Over 160,000 consultations had been completed, which included those of indigenous communities. This had brought justice to the most remote areas of the country.
Between 2021 and 2024, there were 67 registered victims belonging to an indigenous community. A complex investigation had been launched into the four people who had died, which was difficult as this group cremated their bodies. This was more complicated than a typical case.
Social policies were cross-cutting and did not discriminate. The plan for Afro-Venezuelans was accessible online and outlined all the actions planned for the coming years. One of the greatest challenges of this community was self-identification. A centre for African “Know-How” was created in 2011 and it organised activities, including lectures and workshops. This centre had gone beyond African borders and joined universities in Cuba and Haiti. University education in Venezuela was one of the State’s key priorities.
Questions by Committee Experts
ABDERRAHMAN TLEMÇANI, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee would appreciate additional information about the National Council for People of African Descent in Venezuela. What measures had been taken to combat climate change? Was there a provisional date for the next census? When would Venezuela have an updated yearly survey of the 2011 Census?
DIABY BAKARI SIDIKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said the last census was in 2011; what was the difference between Afro descendants and Black people, as outlined in the census? Were there measures to ensure indigenous women and girls increased their literacy rates? What was being done to promote the increased participation of indigenous women in higher learning? How many regional offices were operational for the demarcation of land?
A Committee Expert asked what measures had been taken by the State party in the national legislation to provide reparations for those affected by slavery and colonisation?
Another Expert asked for more detailed information about women, disaggregated by region. Would the State party consider decriminalising abortion, given that the situation was so dire for women?
A Committee Expert asked what did the State consider to be an unrealised goal or activity for people of African descent in the prevailing decade? What would be the priority when the second decade came into effect?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the National Council for the Development of Communities of African Descent in Venezuela was a collegiate body with its own budget. The Council had cross-cutting support duties and supported all public policies on combatting discrimination. Policies had been drafted and were being implemented which took into account the culture and practices of people of African descent when it came to health. In education, tolerance and interculturality were promoted through school programmes and universities. Legislation was in place to combat racial discrimination. Awareness raising of these issues was also promoted in the workplace.
With the support of the Food and Agricultural Organization, the Government had restored 30 lagoons and 118 community wells to ensure access to water for families in the state of Zulia, which had been beneficial to the Wayuu people. Around 450 different water gathering systems had been established. Drought resistant seeds had also been introduced.
There was full recognition of the right to freedom of assembly in Venezuela. The security body had been trained to control public demonstrations in a matter that was in line with human rights standards. Between 2017 and 2021, Venezuela saw 30,191 public demonstrations throughout the country, which clearly highlighted that there was freedom of assembly in the country.
Regarding the different categories in the 2011 Census, the concept of Black was used because of physical characteristics or family dependency, whereas the term Afro descendent related to self-recognition. The next census had been delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Work on this was underway.
Civil society organizations were making significant contributions to Venezuela’s intersectional approach on women. The contributions of indigenous and Afro descendent women were being built into public policy. There were challenges in implementing policies for these groups, but there was also ongoing coordination and discussion with the relevant communities. A total of 403,000 indigenous women had received health care services across the country. There was a focus on indigenous communities and attention was paid to their specific characteristics.
Venezuela had been making efforts to ensure all public spaces were free of discrimination.
Concluding Remarks
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, said in the concluding observations which would be issued, the Committee would request the State party to provide information within one year on certain identified paragraphs. This allowed the Committee to focus on actions which required urgent attention. It was hoped the State was pay attention to this.
DIABY BAKARI SIDIKI, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said it had been a fruitful dialogue; while there had been differences in opinion, this was proof of the vitality of the treaty body system. The Committee remained concerned about allegations of intimidation and reprisals, and would pay close attention to further developments. At the same time, the Committee was reassured by the solemn commitment of the delegation to protect human rights defenders. Mr. Bakari Sidiki thanked the delegation for the frank and honest exchange and wished them a safe journey home.
CLARA VIDAL, Minister of Popular Power for Indigenous Peoples of Venezuela and head of the delegation, said the delegation was committed to implementing all recommendations of the Committee, resulting from the submission of the report. She thanked the Committee for the dialogue and for their time.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CERD24.009E