UN Geneva - Multimedia Newsroom : HRC Press conference

Good morning and good afternoon to you joining us here in Geneva and to our colleagues in the Western Hemisphere.

Good morning to you.

My clock says 2:00 PM here.

So let's start the press conference with with that.

So I would like to welcome you to this virtual press conference with the independent international fact finding mission on Venezuela.

Joining us from Portugal, Chile and Scotland are the three members of the mission, Marta Valinas, the Chairperson, Francisco Cox Bial and Paul Sales.

The mission members are here with us to launch their report which provides an overview on the human rights situation in Venezuela since 2014.

The report is in two parts, a short version containing a much more succinct overview of the mission's findings and a much longer 400 plus page report which contains their detailed findings stemming from their work.

And the report is available in English and Spanish for now.

Other UN languages will be available soon.

Accompanying the report is a press release in English and Spanish as well as annotated notes which will hopefully steer you through it's very comprehensive document.

And with the start of this press conference, I should note that the embargo is hereby lifted on the report.

And simply to remind you that the Fact Finding Mission was established by the Human Rights Council just on just over, or rather just under one year ago in September 2019.

And the mission is scheduled to present this report to the Human Rights Council on the 23rd of September.

So one week from today, I'll now hand over to the mission members for brief opening remarks and to you for your questions.

And if I can kindly ask you to pose your questions in English.

Thank you so much, Please go ahead.

Thank you, Orlando, and a warm welcome to all the journalists who are attending this press conference and everyone who is watching us over the Internet.

Over the past months, the Independent International Fact Finding Mission on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, in accordance with the mandate it was given by the UN Human Rights Council in September of last year, investigated and documented extrajudicial executions, enforces appearances, arbitrary detentions and torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, including sexual and gender based violence, committed in Venezuela since 2014 to the present.

To conduct its investigations, the mission interviewed victims, witnesses and other key sources of information, such as members of security forces and of the judiciary, and reviewed an extensive number of documents and other visual material.

We deeply regret that the government has not replied to any of our correspondents, including when we asked permission to visit the country and to meet with state authorities.

We have also asked for information about the cases documented in the report, and we have offered to send them the report for their consideration ahead of publication.

We received no response.

Our conclusions are clear.

On the basis of the information collected, the Mission has reasonable grounds to believe that serious human rights violations and international crimes took place in Venezuela in the context of public protests of targeted political repression and in the context of security operations.

As documented extensively in our 411 page reports, these violations were committed directly by members of state security forces and intelligence agencies.

We have reasonable grounds to believe that **** level authorities within these entities, as well as political authorities who exercised power and oversight over them, including the President's and the Ministers of Interior and of Defence, were aware of these crimes and either ordered or otherwise contributed to them, namely by adopting plans and policies that led to their Commission, by coordinating activities and by providing the necessary material and human resources.

The determination of their individual criminal responsibility, however, must be made by the competent judicial authorities.

These acts were committed pursuant to two state policies, 1 to quash opposition to the government and another to combat crime, including by eliminating individuals perceived as criminals.

We also consider that the documented crimes were committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population, and For these reasons the Mission has reasonable grounds to believe that they amount to crimes against humanity.

In relation to the policy I just mentioned, to combat crime, the Mission found that arbitrary detentions and extrajudicial executions were committed in the context of security operations, including in joint military and police operations known as the Operations for the Liberation of the People, and other operations undertaken by Special Action Forces of the National Police, known as the FIS, and by the CECPC, the police body in charge of criminal investigations.

Most of the victims were young men who were targeted due to the real or perceived involvement in criminal activities.

The Mission notes that while combating crime and ensuring security for its citizens is a legitimate function of any state, this must be done with full respect for human rights.

The mission's investigations revealed, however, that these victims were killed once they were already under the control of the armed security officials with fatal shots to vital areas, and that these crimes were covered up by state officials who at times planted weapons near victims bodies to claim that they were killed while resisting authority or as a result of confrontations.

In addition, the mission also documented 1 military operation in Bar Lovento, as a result of which five men remained disappeared.

At this time, as Marta has mentioned, after the Mission's investigation has concluded, we have determined that there are reasonable grounds to believe that one of the policies in furtherance of or pursuant to which the multiple crimes and violations were committed was that of quashing political oppositions.

The agencies that implemented that policy were Sabine, the civilian intelligence agency, and the Hasin, the military intelligence and counterintelligence agency.

Those targeted as victims of crimes and violations were often government critics with **** public profiles or people who achieved prominence or represented A perceived ****** due to their actions.

They include social activists and political leaders at the forefront of protests, opposition politicians and military dissidents accused of rebellion, plotting coups or other conspiracies.

Those associated with them were also targeted, including family, friends and colleagues, or even human rights defenders.

With regards to Sabine, those arrested were brought either to Sabine's headquarters in Plaza Venezuela or to Sabine's LL El Eliko, the building, both in Caracas.

Once there, Sabine officials interrogated the detainees without the presence of lawyer or and refused to allow them to contact their lawyers when requested.

As for Decasim, the arrest took place at different points around the country.

Arrestees were then brought to Caracas either directly to Decasim Bolita of first passing through one of several unofficial or clandestine safe houses for hours or days.

The crimes and violations that those agencies committed in a systematic manner were arbitrary detentions, torture including sexual and gender based violence, and short term disappearances.

Members of both agencies hid their identities while making their arrest and did not provide or show an arrest warrant to those being taken into custody.

In some cases, Sabine did not obey judicial orders to release people they had under their custody.

The type of questions asked by both agencies to the detainees seem to seek to obtain a confession or information regarding people seen as contrary to the government.

Torture was used for such purpose, but also as a form of punishment for the acts, views and affiliation of those under custody.

Among the acts of tortures we have reasonable grounds to believe were committed are sexual and gender based violence, forced including forced nudity, **** and threats of ****, targeted violence against male genitals, asphyxiation with toxic substances and water, stress position, prolonged solitary confinement in harsh conditions, cuts and mutilation, electric shocks and threats to family close to those detained.

Some of these acts resulted in serious and or permanent physical.

The Mission documented cases in which Sabine and Decasin official and other authorities either denied having the person in detention or told family members and lawyers trying to locate the detainees like they did not have any information as to their whereabouts.

As for those responsible for the crimes, the Mission has reasonable grounds to believe that the directors of the intelligence entities involved in the Commission of the crimes documented in this report ordered or contributed to the Commission of these crimes and having the effective ability to do so, failed to take preventive and repressive measures.

The Mission also received information of cases in which acts of tortures were committed in the presence or under the supervision of senior officials.

The direct perpetrators of the crimes documented in this report are responsible for their action as well.

I think Paul, you might, I think you want to add yet to unmute.

Go ahead Paul.

Thanks.

Since 2014, there have been thousands of political demonstrations, as many as between 60 and 70,000 by people opposing the government.

And the government's approach to dealing with these protests has been planned at the highest level, and indeed many of those plans have been made public, including, perhaps most famously, plans are more the control of the demonstrations has involved interagency cooperation and organisation and in many situations, the use of the national armed forces in conjunction with the police, intelligence authorities and the political authorities acting together, as well as the development of general plans.

The Mission has reasonable grounds to believe that even in specific operational planning, **** level officials, including at senior military and ministerial levels were also involved.

The Mission has looked in close detail at almost 100 cases of protests and it has reasonable grounds to believe that many of those detained in the context of those protests was subjected to torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

The Mission believes that the practise of torture and related treatment was not simply arising randomly or at the hands of rogue elements within the agencies concerned, but rather was the result of a plan and part of a larger attack on the civilian population and as such constitutes crimes against humanity.

The acts of torture included, among other things, severe beatings, psychological torture regarding threats of execution, carrying out mock executions, threats of execution of family members, sexual *******, ****, the ****** of **** and electrocution.

The mission finds that those responsible for the acts of torture included members of the National Police, the National Guard, the civilian intelligence agency Sabine, and the mission believes that senior authorities, including the president and ministers, knew of the practises in question and are also responsible for them.

The mission also found that in the cases that closely investigated, several civilians had been killed unlawfully by law enforcement agencies in the context of controlling the protests.

In several cases, those agencies had acted either recklessly or disproportionately, for example in using in firing a gas canister at close range where the injuries that the victim suffered led to his death.

Those responsible for killings in this manner include the National Guard, the National Police, local state police, Sabine, and members of the armed forces.

And in other cases, the state authorities also acted in concert with civilian groups of colleague Peebles, who participated in the killing of several protesters around the context of the demonstrations.

Finally, the mission found that a number of protesters had been arbitrarily detained, including in some occasions in massive detention exercises.

It found that in several cases, evidence had been fabricated to justify those arrests, or in other cases, people had not been told why they were being arrested.

However, the scale of arbitrary detention in the context of protests is actually quite a difficult issue to resolve because of the legal and factual complexities around it, and that is something that requires a degree of further investigation.

It's not been possible to carry out all of that at this stage.

Nonetheless, the Mission notes that it has become extremely difficult for protesters to hold legally authorised demonstrations and to freely and peacefully express their political opinion.

On the basis of our investigations and our findings, we call upon the authorities of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to immediately stop these human rights violations and to take all necessary measures to prevent further acts of this nature from taking place.

We welcome the recently announced intention by the Attorney General of holding accountable members of the Special Action Forces for killings and the pardon by President Maduro of political prisoners.

However, we urge authorities to conduct prompt, effective, thorough, independent, impartial and transparent investigations into all the violations and crimes documented in our report and others of a similar nature and to provide full redress to the victims.

Impunity must end.

If Venezuela fails to bring perpetrators to account, we urge other States and International Criminal Court to consider taking action in accordance with the legislation applicable to them.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Marta and Francisco and Paul as well for those opening remarks.

Now we'll take questions.

We have a few hands raised.

We have Jamil Shad Vista de Sao Paulo.

Oh, hi, Jamil.

We can unmute him, please.

Yes, thank you.

Can you hear me?

Yes, yes.

Just a quick question regarding the, the the list of 45 people you mentioned at least on your who are they and what do you expect to happen to these people?

And if in this 45 people mentioned is Mr Maduro or the vice President or the foreign minister in this list?

Thank you very much.

Thanks, Shamil, over to you panellists for thank you.

Go ahead.

I will take this question.

In our report, we detail the persons that we find with reasonable grounds to believe have been involved in the Commission of the various violations and crimes documented in the report.

This includes those that have directly perpetrated perpetrated these crimes and as well those in higher levels of authority, both within the security forces and intelligence agencies that we've named, as well as political authorities who we have reasonable grounds to believe have either ordered or contributed otherwise to the Commission of these crimes.

As mentioned, we have reasonable grounds to believe that the President and the Ministers of Interior and of Defence had knowledge of the crimes that we've documented in our report and have contributed to their Commission.

We note in detail in the report where we have information indicating that they have given orders or that they have coordinated activities, adopted plans and policies, provided logistics, human and other resources for the activities that resulted in the Commission of the crimes documented.

These are the people that we think that judicial authorities, the competent judicial authorities, should investigate and according to their procedures and in line with international human rights standards, determine their criminal responsibility.

Thank you.

Thank you, Martha.

Now to Gabriella Sotomayor of Mexico, La Reforma.

Gabby, go ahead.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Rolando, Thank you for this report.

But according to to the report, the independence of the judiciary is questioned.

So it is difficult for them or I think it is it's going to be difficult to for them to make reliable investigations and for justice to be done.

So my question is whether the International Criminal Court is the only option to do justice or an international tribunal or that could be created.

So what is the way forward to find justice for the victims?

That is one question.

And if may I another one, if you can talk about the current situation with the COVID pandemic and COVID.

COVID pandemic is the repression continuing?

What, what is the actual situation?

If, if, if you can talk a little bit about this?

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Gabby, The two questions for you panellists.

Thank you, Paul.

I suggest you would take the first question.

Thanks, Martin.

Yeah.

In terms of the the way forward, you're quite right to say that there are some serious questions about the record of the justice system to date.

Our report notes that in some limited cases that have been some investigations that have resulted in convictions.

But there is, as far as we can see, no record of any serious investigation into those with a higher level of responsibility in terms of organising, planning, instigating, ordering these kinds of crimes that have been committed.

So the first thing that we would say is that in the first instance, yes, it should be the national authorities that should take on the responsibility to conduct those independent and impartial investigations that Malta already said at the end of her statement.

In the first instance, that is always the most desirable outcome.

But if the Venezuelan authorities are not willing to fail to do anything or don't do anything genuinely, then of course, the International Criminal Court has already indicated that it's examining that position.

And I think 1 can assume it stands ready to to make a decision on whether or not to open an investigation.

I don't know how quickly, but one imagines that that is coming at some stage.

And other states, as Marta obviously also pointed out, may have legislation that allows them to investigate and to prosecute under their own legislation.

So ideally, I think we would say we would love to see the Venezuelan authorities acting independently and impartially to carry out credible investigations, but feeling that, yes, the most obvious alternative would be for the International Criminal Court.

Thank you.

And the question I COVID, regarding COVID, perhaps I can just say a few words.

We have noted in our report that repression against those who have criticised the government also includes persons who have recently criticised government decisions about how to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic.

Due to the timing of our investigations, we have focused on investigations that pardon on violations that have taken place since 2014 till today.

So it's a large time frame and most of our investigations and findings relate to violations that have taken place before 2020.

We do believe, however, that it is necessary to investigate further allegations, including these related to repression of persons who have been critics of the government decisions related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Thank you.

Thank you both.

OK, we have a question now from Laurence Ciero of Swiss News Agency.

Go ahead, Lauren.

Thank you, Rolando and thank you for the press conference.

You mentioned in the report the FEZ and and before you the the **** Commissioner in some countries called for to the authorities to dismantle this unit.

So is that unit still very much active or as this increasing pressure be efficient and and contributed to reduce the level of of extradition judicial killings made by this unit?

Thank you.

According to our investigations, defies the Special Action Forces of the Bolivarian National Police is still active, namely in carrying out operations that results in extrajudicial executions.

We therefore make one very clear recommendation in our report, which is that the government disbands these forces and that any security operations and actions to combat crime are done in full respect of human rights of suspects.

Therefore, we still believe it is a major problem that the government must address are the allegations and the violations committed by these voices.

Thank you.

We have a question now from Isabel Sacco of Spanish News Agency.

Isabel, if we can unmute her, please go ahead.

Isabel.

Yes, good afternoon.

Thank you, Rolando.

Yes, it's related to what my colleagues said on the situation in COVID.

But you mentioned that in this year some health workers has been detained because they were critical to the government.

And I would like to know if you have any information of how many of them may be still detained and in more general terms among protesters, people seen as opponents and other people that the government don't like, doesn't like how many detainees, arbitrary detainees are now in prison in in Venezuela.

And certainly I would like to to know if you can make a parallel between the situation in Venezuela, because I saw that you also mentioned that this repressive policy is against criminal offenders, you know, small criminal offenders in in in a sense to to try to, to clean society.

I understood.

And if you can make a parallel with what happened also in Philippines, because we have known all this strategy of clean society by Philippines, but but I am thinking now that maybe Philippines was inspired by Venezuela and I don't know if you can comment on this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Isabel.

Martha Cisco, I suggest that you take the first question and if you'd like, I can take the second.

As to the the actual numbers of people detained right now, we we investigated 112 arbitrary detentions.

There are other sources that have mentioned that around 3479 cases of politically motivated detentions.

We did not go into the whole number of people being detained in prisons in in Venezuela.

So as what we investigated like I said were 112 arbitrary detentions and in the case of other sources from 2014 till the 15th of July of 2020, the estimate is three 3479 cases of politically motivated detentions, which was our focus due to the policy that we had reasonable grounds to believe that state officials implemented.

Thank you.

In relation to your question on whether Venezuela has been inspired by the Philippines or even the other way around, I will not comment on the situation in the Philippines because we have not been involved in in depth investigations as we have been in Venezuela.

In Venezuela, we do know, based on our investigations, that there have been many cases of arbitrary killings, which we can see.

There are extra extrajudicial executions of individuals, primarily young males, who have been targeted due to their real or perceived belonging to criminal groups and engagement in criminal activities.

As we note in our report, our team has reviewed close to 2500 incidents involving close to 4600 deaths committed by security forces.

This provides the context to what are the violations that we document in the report and that we can see there are extrajudicial executions.

We detail in our report 11 cases involving 18 victims, and we have no doubt that these acts have been done in violation of national and international law.

Thank you.

Thank you again to both of you.

We have a question from Lisa Schlein of Voice of America.

Lisa, go ahead, please.

Yes, right.

Thank you and hello everybody.

I don't, I've rarely heard such sadistic ***** going on.

I mean, I'm wondering why, why this necessity for this kind of *****?

And is it mainly against criminals or are most of the victims of wait, sorry or most of the victims of a political nature?

And then are there any periods where the kind of torture and other ***** that you document occurred which are worse than others, and what might have prompted the kind of sadistic reaction in those cases?

And now you say that there has been no response at all from the government.

You've made attempts to reach out to them, apparently, but no response from them at all.

And then lastly, sorry about this, but is this the kind of torture and extrajudicial killings is it's, I gather it's still going on, but is it of a kind of extreme nature that may have occurred earlier because perhaps there has been some sort of international observation of what is going on in Venezuela, which is perhaps keeping them a little bit quieter?

I will.

I will address this question in terms of the periods in which the violations that we've documented took place and whether there were certain periods where there was an increase in those violations.

This depends on the types of violations and the contexts that we have documented in the report.

So the the answer varies in terms of violations committed in the context of protests.

We have noticed peaks not only of the protests, but actually of the reactions to the protesters and the violations committed in the context of those reactions.

We have noticed three peaks and we have documented them, and they are linked to periods when there was a greater political turmoil in the country.

As to other contexts of political repression, for example, and specifically the act of torture against those that are critics of the government or perceived as being against the government.

These acts we have found throughout the period of review that they were more constant.

In fact, that is why we have said that we have reasonable grounds to believe that they are part of a systematic conduct.

They have taken place since 2014 to the present day.

As to the violations committed in the context of security operations, you will see in our report that there have been some changes in the government's approach.

And so we had security operations that were joint military and police operations called, as I said, the operations for the liberation of the people that then turned into the operations for humane liberation of the people.

And then we've seen an increase intervention of the Special action forces that I've also mentioned the fives.

So in terms of time, of course there are differences.

But what we did not find a difference in relation to that is in the level of the and the seriousness of the violations.

So for example, in terms of the policy to combat crime, we have found that throughout this.

And even with this different in the implementation of these different plans, we have found that the violations were were constant and and and took place during the whole period of review.

So unfortunately, so far, we have not been able to discern a decrease in the violations due to international presence or pressure, although of course that is very much our hope.

And as we said, we call upon the authorities to immediately put a stop to these violations.

Thank you.

Thank you, Marta.

I have a question now from Anatoly Kurmanayev.

Go ahead.

Anatoly.

Good, good afternoon.

I have a question for for Paul and for Marta.

The the language of a press conference and the report the gravity of it goes beyond what the the office has has found in the past.

Paul has has called the the violations crimes against humanity and Maritza has urged other states to take action to to bring perpetrators to justice.

However, this report merely follows on on existing investigations done by the Office of **** Commissioner on Venezuelan human rights violations.

You know, over a year ago your office found mass extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions.

My question is, what has prompted this toughening of language?

What, what, what is it?

What, what new have you found that made your office adapt the toughest stance and call for greater responsibility for Venezuelan government?

Paul, would you like to respond?

Thank you.

Thanks very much for the question.

I think the first thing to point out is that the independent fact finding mission is appointed by the Human Rights Council as an independent mandate and is not a part of the Office of the **** Commissioner for Human Rights.

So that's I think the very first and most important answer to your question, that it's it's not a continuation or a follow on of previous work or a continuation of the **** Commissioner's work.

This is a separate independent fact finding report.

The second thing I think is that the focus and nature of the investigation in respect of in particular certain specific cases has been much more detailed than the any previous kind of analysis has been able to do.

What prompts the toughening of language is not that that is predicated on a sense that it's a continuum of some description of building and previous.

This is the first independent fact finding report and all it's doing is finding and expressing its findings on the basis of the information that it has uncovered.

And Simply put, the it's not a toughening or a strengthening, it's the sober reflection of the conclusions that we've found on the basis of the information and evidence that we've assembled.

So it's not a toughening of language, it's a reasonable conclusion based on the reasonable grounds that we have as a result of the information that we've assessed.

Thank you.

Thank you, Paul.

Martha, do you want to add?

No, OK.

No.

Thank you also for stressing the distinction between the office and independent mandate you have.

Nick.

Coming, Bruce.

New York Times if we can unmute Nick, please.

Yeah.

Hi.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Great.

Thanks.

Your report drills down quite deeply into the role of of senior figures in the government.

You say that to President Maduro even bypass the chain of command to to engage with middle ranking people in perpetration of some of these violations.

Can you say, did you actually tie the president to the specific detention and treatment of particular individuals?

And a second question, since you're veterans of the ICC, at what point should they become more involved?

What kind of action?

How long should they wait?

What further steps should be taken as a result, specifically of this report by the IC CS Prosecutor's office?

Thank you.

Francisco, would you like to take the first question and I will take the second.

Yes, as we do have information that President Maduro sidetracked the the chain of command, but that doesn't mean that the chain of command wasn't in place.

So there were, I mean the way Sabine worked and the Kasim worked, but particularly Sabine was to do intelligence on people beforehand and these people that were targeted the information.

And we have reasonable grounds to believe that the President Maduro did give orders to the director of Sabine as to who target.

After that, these people were surveilled, information was gathered, their communications were intercepted and finally they were they would be detained without judicial order just because there there was such a order by the president.

So we have involvement and contribution to the crime of by Mr Maduro, either directly through the chain of command and sometimes circumvailing the chain of command and giving the direct order.

But as we said, what we have reasonable grounds to believe is that this is a state policy.

It's not just a random acts of officials in Sabine, but it is a political decision to target political opposition to quash this opposition.

Thank you.

In relation to your second question, we believe that it is important to afford justice to the victims and their relatives as quick as possible.

That is part of their right to access to justice.

Having said that, we respect, of course, the full independence of the International Criminal Court and therefore we do not want to be prescriptive in any way in terms of what the International Criminal Court should do or not do, even in terms of when they should act.

What we have said in our report, in our recommendations is that we call upon the International Criminal Court to take into account the victims needs to have justice served in a timely fashion.

However, we understand that each institution needs time to conduct their examinations and then investigations, so we respect that and I would not say anything more specific on that.

What I would like to highlight is even at the national level, there are many victims and the relatives who have been waiting and fighting for justice for many years now.

And we definitely would like their cause for justice to, to, to be heard.

Thank you.

Thank you both.

I, I have a question that's come in via chat and the question is from ARD German TV.

The question is, did the Commission find that arbitrary detentions, atrocities against demonstrators, etcetera are taking place over all over or mainly in the cities?

If you could respond to that, please.

Thanks.

I think it's fair to say that the happened mainly and happens mainly in, in a number of of cities around the country, not just in Caracas, but I would say yes, in, in principally in urban areas without a shadow of a doubt in perhaps 2 or 4 areas in particular.

But yes, it's the, the attack, the protests themselves.

Although as I said at the beginning, there's been as many as between 60 and 70,000 demonstrations since 2014.

And obviously not all of them are happening in in the major urban areas, but the vast majority and certainly the ones that we've looked at in detail are the ones that have been taking place principally in, in the, in the larger urban areas.

I wonder if I can just add one small thing to the last question.

I think it's also important to bear in mind when we're talking about the rights of justice to the to the victims, we are also emphasising that it's not just the creation of criminal justice that the the victims are intelligible to hear.

There are questions of significant indemnification and compensation that should also be consider there's an obligation in the parts of the Venezuelan authorities.

It's not just the question of of criminal responsibility.

The victims rights said go far beyond that.

Thanks, Paul.

OK, we've if you have a few more minutes for questions.

And actually if that's OK panellists, we have another question from Gabby from La Reforma and then Laurent from Swiss News.

So Gabriella, go ahead.

Yes, thank you very much.

Thank you, Ronaldo.

Can the magnitude and severity of these crimes be compared with those committed in dictatorships such as Argentina or Chile?

And another question, last questions.

Now what is next?

Do you need to expand your research, go to the country?

What, what, what is next?

Now what do you need in terms of to, to complete your, your report?

Thank you.

Thank you, Francisco.

I can take the 1st and I'll take the second.

I think making comparisons is a bit difficult since, of course, being a Chilean, I know the Chilean experience and the Argentine experience.

But I think what we have here, I mean what we've investigated is that there are arbitrary detention, that torture is systematic and therefore crime against humanity.

That if there is a policy installed to detain and to quash opposition, and that in our sense is is is a crime against humanity that must be accounted for and those responsible for it must be brought to justice.

In terms of comparisons, I, I think it's, it's we're not in that position.

We're an independent fact finding mission on Venezuela.

So making comparisons about dictatorships or other countries, I think it is not in our mandate no matter what our personal views are on the matter.

So thank you regarding what needs to happen.

What needs to happen are further investigations and accountability.

That is what we say in our report and that's also what we will be saying at the Human Rights Council when we present formally our report on the 23rd of September of this year.

What will happen in terms of our effect finding mission?

Well, I I don't know that at the moment.

As I said, we will be presenting our report, we'll be discussing it in an interactive dialogue with the Human Rights Council members and we will see what happens after that.

But what I want to highlight is that there are several actors that need and can have a role in what needs to to happen, the investigations and the accountability that I mentioned.

This could include other Human Rights Council mandated bodies.

Of course, as we said, the state is the primary bearer of the duty to investigate and hold to account the perpetrators and provide justice to the victims.

And then of course, if the state fails to do so, we have also mentioned other States and International Criminal Court.

Now, in terms of further investigations of the sort that we have conducted as an independent fact finding mission, access to a country is desirable and I believe is important.

It gives us closer access to victims who are still living in the country and to places where violations took place to the authorities.

However, I would also like to highlight that even without access to the country, our fact finding mission was able to conduct thorough and in depth investigations over the past months.

Thankfully, we were able to count on the technology advances that permit us to be closer to individuals leaving all over the the world, including in Venezuela and in a secure way.

Therefore, it is not, it has not Hanford us, it has not impeded us from conducting our investigations and from drawing solid conclusions which are documented in our report.

Thank you, Thank you both and of course the colleagues.

We'll we'll keep you informed of developments at the Council as a follow up, potential follow up to the emissions report.

Laurent Ciero, I think this may be our last question if we can unmute Laurent, go ahead.

Follow on.

Yeah, thank you.

Actually it's a kind of follow up on Gabriella's question.

Are you formally calling the the council to renew your mandate and do you fear that the violation might be further expanded in the period before the elections in December?

And if you're renewed, how do you intend to monitor that pre electoral.

In the country?

Thank you.

On the 23rd of September, when we have the interactive dialogue at Human Rights Council, what we will be doing is presenting our findings, our conclusions and our recommendations to the Council.

It is for the Council members to think of whether they may want a follow up body mandated by the Council in terms of the increased risk in the period prior to the elections.

Yes, I think it is a period where we all need to be alert to possible to a possible increase in human rights violations.

Therefore, not only Human Rights Council mandated bodies, but other UN bodies and other actors.

It is definitely a period for increased attention.

I would not be able to tell you how we would be monitoring that since our mandate ends now at the end of September.

And all I can speak of is what we have done so far and we'll still do until the end of this month.

Thank you.

Thank you, Marta, and to you as well, Francisco and Paul.

Unless you have any concluding remarks, I think we could draw our press conference to a close here.

It's just under one hour.

I'd like to thank you very much for joining us and sorry you can't be here in person again.

Colleagues, the Commission of members will present this report launched today on the 23rd, one week from today, and we will keep you informed of any developments from now until then.

Thank you very much for joining us and have a good day.

Thank you.

HRC Press conference - Venezuela 16 September 2020