IACHR Files Application Before Inter-American Court of Human Rights in Case Concerning Disproportionate Use of Force During Demonstrations in Venezuela

September 26, 2024

Washington, D.C. – The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) filed on July 9, 2024, an application before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in Case 12,582, with regard to Venezuela. This case concerns the disproportionate use of force by officers of the State in the unlawful repression of a demonstration held in April 2002, which left seven people dead and five people injured.

On April 11, 2002, the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers of Commerce and the Venezuelan Workers' Confederation led a demonstration in Caracas against dismissals in the State-run oil company Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA).

During that protest, officers of the National Guard and the Caracas Metropolitan Police, along with unidentified individuals, attacked demonstrators using tear gas, bullets, and stones. Members of the pro-government Bolivarian Circles were also said to have been deployed to counter the protest. Complaints filed against the country's president, Defense minister, and attorney general at the time and against three private individuals were dismissed or otherwise failed to make progress.

In Merits Report 313/23, the IACHR said that officers of the State had used lethal force near the El Silencio subway station, killing Jhony Palencia, Juan David Querales, and Víctor Emilio Reinoso and injuring Fernando Joel Sánchez Colmenares. In the area known as "La Pedrera", officers of the State and members of the Bolivarian Circles also used lethal force, killing Jesús Orlando Arellano, Jesús Mohamad Capote, Orlando Rojas, and José Antonio Gamallo and injuring José Antonio Dávila Uzcátegui, Elías Belmonte Torres, Jean Carlos Serrano, and Andrés Trujillo.

The IACHR found that Venezuela had failed to justify the legitimate, necessary, and proportionate use of lethal force and concluded that the State was responsible for violations of the rights to life and personal integrity. The IACHR further noted that the victims—with the exception of José Antonio Dávila Uzcátegui, who was on the roof of his apartment building at the time—had been peacefully exercising their right to demonstrate and that it had not been proved that they might have been armed or attacked the authorities.

The IACHR also stressed that, after more than 20 years, the case was yet to be solved and that no one had been convicted in connection with it, which was evidence of the prevailing impunity and of the failure to conduct an appropriate investigation. The IACHR also said that it had not been proved that the victims might have been obstructing the investigation and that the impact on the victims' personal integrity might have been a reason to speed up the investigation. The Commission therefore concluded that the State had violated the right to judicial guarantees and the right to psychological and moral integrity of the victims' relatives.

Based on all these considerations, the Commission found that the State of Venezuela was responsible for violations of the rights held in Articles 4 (right to life), 5 (right to humane treatment), 8.1 (right to judicial guarantees), 15 (right to freedom of assembly), and 25.1 (right to judicial protection) of the American Convention, in keeping with the obligations held in Article 1.1 of the same instrument, with regard to the individuals identified in the various sections of the Merits Report.

The IACHR therefore asked the State to adopt the following redress measures:

1. Provide comprehensive reparations—both material and immaterial—for all human rights violations mentioned in the report
2. Pursue an effective and timely criminal investigation before civilian courts to establish these events and to identify and punish anyone responsible for them
3. Take measures of non-recurrence to (i) restrict the deployment of the Armed Forces for tasks linked to law and order merely to exceptional situations, and ensure compliance with all preventive safeguards when using force; (ii) strengthen the public prosecutor's office and judicial authorities in the criminal court district of the state of Aragua; and (iii) ensure that any restrictions imposed on the right to freedom of assembly are consistent with the American Convention

A principal, autonomous body of the Organization of American States (OAS), the IACHR derives its mandate from the OAS Charter and the American Convention on Human Rights. The Inter-American Commission has a mandate to promote respect for and to defend human rights in the region and acts as a consultative body to the OAS in this area. The Commission is composed of seven independent members who are elected in an individual capacity by the OAS General Assembly and who do not represent their countries of origin or residence.

No. 227/24

2:30 PM