

Currently released so far... 12404 / 251,287
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/24
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/10
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Adana
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belmopan
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
Consulate Dubai
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Kolkata
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Melbourne
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
USUN New York
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
ASEC
AE
AF
AM
AR
AJ
AU
AORC
AG
AEMR
AMGT
APER
AGMT
AL
AFIN
AO
AMED
ADCO
AS
ABUD
ABLD
ASUP
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
APECO
AID
AND
AMBASSADOR
AN
ARM
AY
AODE
AMG
ASCH
AMCHAMS
ARF
APCS
APEC
ASEAN
AGAO
ANET
ADPM
ACOA
ACABQ
AORL
AFFAIRS
ATRN
ACS
AFSI
AFSN
ADANA
ASIG
AA
AX
AUC
AC
AECL
AADP
AGRICULTURE
AMEX
ACAO
ACBAQ
AQ
AORG
ADM
AINF
AIT
ASEX
AGR
AROC
ATFN
AFGHANISTAN
AFU
AER
ALOW
AZ
AVERY
BA
BY
BU
BR
BE
BL
BO
BK
BM
BILAT
BH
BEXP
BF
BTIO
BC
BBSR
BMGT
BTIU
BG
BWC
BB
BD
BX
BP
BRUSSELS
BN
BIDEN
BT
CW
CH
CF
CD
CV
CVIS
CM
CE
CA
CJAN
CLINTON
CIA
CU
CASC
CI
CO
CACM
CDB
CN
CMGT
CS
CG
CBW
CIS
CR
CONDOLEEZZA
CPAS
CAN
CWC
CY
COUNTER
CDG
CL
CT
CIC
CIDA
CSW
CHR
CB
CODEL
COUNTERTERRORISM
CTR
COM
CICTE
CFED
CJUS
CKGR
CBSA
CEUDA
CARSON
CONS
CITEL
CLMT
CROS
CITT
CAC
CVR
CDC
CAPC
COPUOS
CBC
CBE
CARICOM
COE
COUNTRY
CLEARANCE
CACS
CTM
CNARC
ECON
EFIN
ETRD
EUN
EFIS
EG
ETTC
EZ
EPET
EAID
EAGR
ENRG
ECUN
EU
ELAB
ECPS
EAIR
EINV
ELTN
EWWT
EIND
EMIN
EI
ECIN
ENVR
ELECTIONS
EINVEFIN
EN
ES
ER
EC
EUC
EINT
EINVETC
ENGR
ET
EK
ENIV
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
ECONOMY
EAP
EFTA
EUR
EUMEM
EXIM
ERD
ENERG
EUREM
ESA
ERNG
EXTERNAL
EPA
EINVECONSENVCSJA
ECONOMICS
ELN
EINN
EFINECONCS
ENNP
EEPET
ETRDEINVTINTCS
ENVI
ETRO
ESENV
ECINECONCS
ECONOMIC
EAIDS
EDU
ETRA
ETRN
EFIM
EIAR
ETRC
EAIG
EXBS
EURN
ECIP
EREL
ECA
ENGY
ECONCS
ECONEFIN
ETC
ETRDECONWTOCS
EUNCH
EINDETRD
IR
IZ
IS
IAEA
INRB
IRAJ
IQ
IN
IT
IMO
INTERPOL
ICAO
IO
IC
ITALY
ITALIAN
IRAQI
ICTY
ID
IPR
IWC
ILC
INTELSAT
IL
IBRD
IMF
IA
IRC
ICRC
ILO
ITU
ITRA
IV
IDA
IAHRC
ICJ
ISRAELI
IRS
INMARSAT
ISRAEL
ISLAMISTS
INDO
IZPREL
ITPHUM
ITPGOV
ITF
IBET
IEFIN
INR
IACI
INTERNAL
IDP
IGAD
IEA
ICTR
IIP
INRA
INRO
IF
KJUS
KSCA
KNNP
KU
KCOR
KCRM
KDEM
KTFN
KHLS
KPAL
KWBG
KACT
KGHG
KPAO
KTIA
KIRF
KWMN
KS
KG
KZ
KN
KMDR
KISL
KSPR
KHIV
KPRP
KAWK
KR
KUNR
KDRG
KCIP
KGCC
KTIP
KSUM
KPKO
KVIR
KAWC
KPIN
KGIC
KRAD
KIPR
KOLY
KCFE
KMCA
KE
KV
KICC
KNPP
KBCT
KSEP
KFRD
KFLU
KVPR
KOCI
KBIO
KSTH
KMPI
KCRS
KOMC
KTBT
KPLS
KIRC
KREL
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KFLO
KBTS
KSTC
KTDB
KFSC
KX
KFTFN
KNEI
KIDE
KREC
KMRS
KICA
KPAONZ
KCGC
KSAF
KRGY
KCMR
KRVC
KVRP
KSEO
KCOM
KAID
KTEX
KNUC
KNAR
KNUP
KNNPMNUC
KLIG
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KCRCM
KHDP
KGIT
KNSD
KOMS
KWMM
KPAI
KHSA
KTLA
KO
KMFO
KRCM
KCSY
KSAC
KTRD
KPWR
KID
KWNM
KRIM
KPOA
KCHG
KOM
KSCI
KFIN
KMOC
KESS
KWAC
KMIG
KSEC
KIFR
KDEMAF
KPRV
KBTR
KERG
KTER
KDDG
KPAK
KRFD
KHUM
KDEV
KCFC
KWWMN
KWMNCS
KJUST
MARR
MOPS
MU
MTCRE
MNUC
MY
MASS
MCAP
MOPPS
MAR
MPOS
MO
ML
MR
MASC
MX
MD
MP
MA
MTRE
MIL
MCC
MZ
MK
MDC
MRCRE
MAPS
MV
MI
MEPN
MAPP
MEETINGS
MAS
MTS
MLS
MILI
MTCR
MG
MC
MARAD
MIK
MILITARY
MEDIA
MEPI
MUCN
MEPP
MT
MERCOSUR
MW
MASSMNUC
MQADHAFI
NZ
NATO
NG
NI
NO
NATIONAL
NU
NPT
NIPP
NL
NPG
NS
NA
NGO
NP
NSG
NDP
NAFTA
NR
NC
NH
NE
NSF
NPA
NK
NSSP
NRR
NATOPREL
NSC
NT
NW
NORAD
NEW
NV
NSFO
NAR
NASA
NZUS
OTRA
OVIP
OPRC
OPDC
OSCE
OAS
ODIP
OIIP
OFDP
OVP
OREP
OFFICIALS
OSAC
OEXC
OPCW
OIE
OIC
OFDA
OSCI
OPIC
OBSP
OECD
ON
OCII
OHUM
OES
OCS
OMIG
OPAD
OTR
PGOV
PREL
PHUM
PINR
PTER
PSOE
PINS
PARM
PK
PBTS
PEPR
PM
POLITICAL
PARTIES
PREF
PBIO
PROP
PA
PSI
PINT
PO
PKFK
PL
PAK
PE
POLITICS
PINL
POL
PHSA
PU
PF
POV
PFOR
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PARMS
PRGOV
PNAT
POLINT
PRAM
PMAR
PG
PAO
PROG
PRELP
PPA
PCUL
PSEPC
PSA
PREO
PAHO
PGIV
PREFA
PALESTINIAN
PAIGH
POSTS
PTBS
PGOVLO
PORG
PGOVE
PLN
PINF
PAS
PUNE
POLICY
PDEM
PDOV
PCI
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PBT
PHUMPGOV
PMIL
PNG
PP
PS
PHUH
PECON
POGOV
PY
PHUMPREL
PHUS
PRL
PGOC
PNR
PGGV
PROV
PTERE
PGOF
PHUMBA
PEL
RS
RU
RW
REGION
RP
RICE
ROBERT
RSP
RUPREL
RM
RO
RCMP
RSO
RELATIONS
REACTION
REPORT
RIGHTS
ROOD
RF
RFE
RIGHTSPOLMIL
SP
SA
SY
SF
SYR
SENV
SCUL
SOCI
SNAR
SO
SU
SG
STEINBERG
SHUM
SW
SMIG
SR
SZ
SIPRS
SI
SAARC
SPCE
SARS
SN
SYRIA
SANC
SL
SCRS
SC
SENVKGHG
SAN
SNARCS
SHI
SWE
SNARIZ
SIPDIS
SEN
SNARN
SPCVIS
SEVN
SSA
SH
SOFA
SK
ST
TPHY
TU
TRGY
TI
TX
TS
TW
TC
TFIN
TD
TSPA
TH
TT
TIP
TBIO
TSPL
TZ
TERRORISM
TRSY
TN
THPY
TINT
TF
TL
TV
TK
TO
TP
TURKEY
TNGD
TBID
TAGS
TR
UP
US
UNSC
UK
UZ
UE
UNESCO
UV
UNGA
UN
UNMIK
UNO
UY
UAE
UNEP
UG
UNHCR
UNHRC
USUN
UNAUS
USTR
USNC
USOAS
UNCHR
UNCSD
UNDP
USEU
USPS
UNDC
UNDESCO
UNCHC
UNFICYP
UNC
UNODC
UNPUOS
UNCND
UNICEF
UNCHS
UNVIE
USAID
UNIDROIT
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 05CARACAS2404, REACTION TO IACHR VARGAS DECISION
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #05CARACAS2404.
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L CARACAS 002404
SIPDIS
NSC FOR CBARTON
USCINCSO ALSO FOR POLAD
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/25/2014
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREL SOCI CS VE
SUBJECT: REACTION TO IACHR VARGAS DECISION
REF: STATE 01544
Classified By: DEPUTY CHIEF OF MISSION JOHN CREAMER 1.4 (d)
-------
SUMMARY
-------
¶1. (C) The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR)
passed a resolution accepting Venezuela's admission of
responsibility for all charges in the case of Blanco Romero y
Otros vs. Venezuela. The Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights (the Commission) and representatives for the victims
(the defense) alleged that the GOV had violated articles of
the Inter-American Charter on Human Rights (the Charter)
protecting life, personal integrity and liberty, and had
failed to provide judicial remedies sufficient to protect
those rights. The GOV's written concession June 28
contradicted allegations regarding due process and state
responsibility, and was rejected by the defense. However the
court, after clarifying the nature of the GOV's concession
via oral testimony, passed a resolution accepting the
concession. Venezuelan human rights leaders viewed the
hearing as a validation of the victims' families quest for
justice. Still, the GOV's subsequent attempts to cloud its
ultimate responsibility in the public's eye cast doubt as to
whether the GOV was acting in good faith. The ultimate test
of GOV intentions will be whether it complies with the
IACHR's sentence which is expected this fall. End summary.
-----------------------------------
Commission Brings Case Before IACHR
-----------------------------------
¶2. (U) The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (the
Commission) brought the case of Blanco Romero y Otros vs.
Venezuela before the IACHR in June 2004. The Commission's
allegations in the suit stemmed from the forced
disappearances of Oscar Blanco Romero, Roberto Hernandez Paz
and Jose Rivas Fernandez following a natural disaster in the
Vargas region in 1999, when torrential rains and mudslides
left approximately 20,000 dead and resulted in widespread
lawlessness. According to testimony provided by the victim's
families to the Inter-American Court, security forces -
tasked by the GOV with maintaining public order - arrested
Blanco, Hernandez and Rivas during its round-up of looting
suspects. None of the victims was seen by their families
again and, after the GOV's investigations stalled and
separate Venezuelan courts ruled against motions of habeas
corpus, the victim's families turned to the Commission to
obtain justice in the case.
¶3. (U) The Commission charged the GOV with the violation of
the victims' rights to life, integrity and liberty under the
Charter. For its failure to properly investigate and
prosecute the victims' disappearances, the Commission also
charged the GOV with violating Article 8 (Judicial
Guarantees) and Article 25 (Judicial Protection) of the same
charter. The Commission requested that the IACHR issue a
declaration of state responsibility for the charges dealing
with personal integrity and judicial guarantees contained
under Articles 5, 8 and 25. The suit brought by the
Commission also noted that the GOV had violated several
articles under the Inter-American Charter on Forced
Disappearances and the Inter-American Charter on the
Prevention and Sanctioning of Torture.
-----------------------------------------
Defense Cites GOV For Lack Of Due Process
-----------------------------------------
¶4. (U) In October 2004, representatives of the victims and
the victims' families (the defense) presented several more
allegations against the GOV before the IACHR. Most of the
defense's additional charges centered on the lack of due
process in the case. The defense charged the GOV with
"violating the families' and Venezuelan society's right to
the truth" as to what occurred in Vargas in December 1999
under articles 1, 8, 13, 25 and of the Charter. The defense
also alleged that the GOV had not fulfilled its duty to
provide Venezuelans with judicial recourse sufficient to
guarantee those human rights protected by the Charter and to
abolish practices which violated those rights.
-------------------------------------
GOV 'Ignorant' As To IACHR Procedures
-------------------------------------
¶5. (C) The GOV offered no response to the allegations in its
contra although, according to IACHR procedures, it should
have filed a written response to the suit with the court.
Despite the GOV's lack of response, the Court convened public
hearings on the case June 27 and 28 to finalize the
allegations against the GOV and admit witness and expert
testimony into the court's record. Carlos Ayala, a lawyer for
the defense, informed poloff July 11 that one week prior to
the hearings, the GOV offered to sign a friendly agreement to
forgo the public hearing. Ayala stated that the GOV's lack
of response and last minute offer betrayed an overall
ignorance of how to function in an international context
governed by set rules and procedures. The defense rejected
the GOV's offer and the case proceeded as planned to oral
hearings held June 27 and 28.
------------------------------
GOV Concedes To All Charges...
------------------------------
¶6. (C) On June 28, after the court had heard witness and
expert testimony on the events which occurred in Vargas in
December 1999, representatives of the GOV elected to read a
written letter of concession in lieu of presenting oral
arguments. Ayala told poloff July 11 that the GOV's
concession at that point in the proceedings was a surprise.
The normal process is for a concession to be made at the
beginning of the hearings and not after testimony.
¶7. (U) The GOV's concession began by stating that it
"conceded to the allegations made in the suit against the
State of Venezuela and accepted in good faith its
international responsibility in this case." The GOV
specified that as a consequence of this concession it
recognized its commitment to reparations including the
indemnization of the victim's families, a guarantee of no
repetition, and the obligation to investigate the case and to
punish those responsible. The GOV made no mention of
judicial reform, which the Commission had specifically
requested.
--------------
...Or Does It?
--------------
¶8. (C) Ayala told poloff July 11 that the GOV's written
concession also contradicted several key charges in its
contra. The GOV stated that it had begun a serious
investigation and initiated judicial remedies to find those
responsible for the disappearances "without losing any time"
after Vargas tragedy in December 1999. The GOV also asserted
that there was no lapse of justice as regards the
representation's denied motions of habeas corpus, and that
the Venezuelan courts acted "strictly according to the law
and constitution" in issuing those decisions. These two
points contradicted allegations regarding the lack of due
process on the case.
¶9. (U) The GOV's written concession also denied state
responsibility for the violations committed in Vargas. After
noting that the GOV had reformed the Venezuelan penal code to
bring it in line with the Inter-American Charter on Forced
Disappearances and promising to conclude the investigations
of the disappearances of those cited in the case, the GOV
asked the court to declare that the violations in Vargas
resulted from "the isolated conduct of low ranking officials
that could in no way be attributed to orders issued down the
chain of command of the Venezuelan government."
-------------------------------------------
Defense Asks Court To Reject GOV Concession
-------------------------------------------
¶10. (C) Jose Gregorio Guarenas, one of the lawyers present
for the defense, told poloff July 12 that the defense
requested a recess to review the GOV's written concession.
Upon review, the defense asked the IACHR to reject the GOV's
written concession because it contradicted important
allegations against the GOV and therefore did not qualify as
a concession as outlined by article 53.2 of the IACHR's
regulations. Guarenas stated that instead of passing the case
to sentencing as requested by the defense, the court decided
to take the oral testimony of the GOV in order to clarify the
nature of its written concession.
--------------------------------------------- ------
GOV Testifies To Full Responsibility Before IACHR...
--------------------------------------------- ------
¶11. (C) In answer to the questions posed by the court, the
GOV testified that it fully accepted the facts of the case as
well as the allegations against it. The court noted the GOV
"acting on good faith, accepted its international
responsibility in this case" and had made a full concession.
Defense attorney Liliana Ortega told Poloff July 12 that the
GOV's written concession was a media stunt designed to cloud
the issue in the public's mind, but that in the view of the
court, the GOV had made a full concession. Still, she noted
that the GOV's written concession as well as its oral
testimony were recorded as part of the IACHR's resolution on
the case.
--------------------------------------------- ---------
...But GOV Leaders Present Different Picture To Public
--------------------------------------------- ---------
¶12. (C) Attorney General Isaias Rodriguez speaking to press
July 29 stated that the IACHR decision ""did not condemn
Venezuela, but rather established an important distinction
between some officers acting individually and the state."
Rodriguez added the Public Ministry was investigating those
functionaries who had committed excesses. The President of
the Supreme Court Omar Mora Diaz told the press July 29 that
in admitting that human rights violations had occurred in
Vargas, Venezuela had demonstrated that it was a responsible
state. Furthermore, Mora continued, authorities were asked
to control the situation with regard for human rights, but
"this isn't to say that some low-level functionary might not
have committed some outrage." Carlos Ayala told Poloff July
11 that he was concerned by public statements made by GOV
officials alleging a lack of state responsibility for Vargas
and that he planned to submit these reports to the IACHR.
-------
Comment
-------
¶13. (C) The GOV's concession on Vargas appears to be driven
more by a lack of alternatives than a desire to make amends.
The GOV conceded to cover a weak case, and then attempted to
spin its concession to the court and the Venezuelan public as
an act of good faith. GOV remarks to the public denying
state responsibility directly conflict with its concession to
the court. IACHR sentencing is due this fall, and the
defense has requested reparations which extend beyond the
financial to include guarantees of non-repetition. This would
imply real judicial reform. Whether or not the GOV makes
these amends will be a far more telling indication of its
good faith than its concession to the court.
Brownfield
NNNN
2005CARACA02404 - CONFIDENTIAL