The Scientific, Criminal and Criminal Investigation Corps (CICPC) summoned Oscar Murillo this Sunday to appear on Wednesday, November 20th, to the headquarters of the agency on Urdaneta Avenue in Caracas. He is a renowned Venezuelan journalist and current General Coordinator of NGO Provea, due to an alleged investigation carried out by the municipal delegation of the CICPC of San Cristóbal, Táchira State for the alleged “commission of a crime contemplated in the LAW AGAINST HATE, FOR PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE AND TOLERANCE” which, as we have denounced on repeated occasions, has served to prosecute and charge hundreds of Venezuelan detainees and escalate the crime of persecution for political reasons in our country.
Although the “summons” ticket does not clarify the origin and basis of the alleged investigation carried out by the CICPC, nor the procedural status under which the university professor Óscar Murillo must appear, this situation occurs in the midst of a dizzying escalation of abuses recorded after the elections of July 28th and new acts of harassment and threats led by the Minister of Internal Affairs, Justice and Peace, Mr. Diosdado Cabello, against people and organizations that requested an impartial investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death of Mr. Edwin Santos in the state of Apure.
“They will be summoned by the CICPC”
On October 30th, 2024, Mr. Diosdado Cabello again questioned the work of human rights NGO Provea on his television program ‘Con el mazo dando’ (Hitting with the club). There he spoke out about the complaint of the alleged murder of opposition leader Edwin Santos.
We recall that, according to various testimonies, the social leader disappeared on October 23rd. This fact was publicly exposed by his family through a video made by his wife Loliveth Álvarez and the Jesuit priest, Gerardo Rosales.
Later, the family of Edwin Santos confirmed his death on October 25th, news that had a great impact internationally.
These facts were thoroughly documented and reported by Provea and when the news broke we demanded an investigation by the State. However, Douglas Rico – director of the Scientific, Penal and Criminal Investigations Corps (CICPC) – maintained through a statement that Mr. Santos had died as a result of a traffic accident.
Since then, the authorities have promoted acts of harassment against those who demand an investigation into the death of Mr. Santos.
“Those who said there are witnesses (to the murder) will be summoned to the CICPC, they will have to bring the witnesses so that it is not believed that we are persecuting here, I know of several organizations and NGOs, we are going to call them all and they have to present their witnesses, some say it was the Sebin, the Dgcim, the National Police, come to an agreement (…) if Provea said it has witnesses, Provea has to look for the witnesses, there is no need to hide that they are an NGO, you crossed the line, on July 28th you crossed the line, here the bullshit is over,” said Mr. Cabello on October 30th, threatening the members of our team who, we kindly remind, are beneficiaries of protection measures from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) due to the constant threats uttered by high-ranking State officials and official spokespersons, including the current Minister Cabello.
Between 2020 and 2024, the IACHR determined that the members of PROVEA are in a situation of risk under the framework of their work as human rights defenders in the current context that Venezuela is going through, “considering the visibility of the institution and its coordinators, the frequent stigmatizing remarks made by high-ranking state authorities in the media, the surveillance and monitoring by state agents.”
In April 2024, the IACHR decided to extend its scope of protection to all members of Provea, whom it considers at risk due to their work protecting human rights in Venezuela.
“The situation of the members of PROVEA has been worsening over time, extending the risk status of the coordination of the institution to all its members.” In this regard, the extension of the present precautionary measures was requested in favor of 16 people from our team, including Óscar Murillo, General Coordinator of Provea.
The IACHR highlighted that “the existence and dissemination of stigmatizing and pejorative expressions by state authorities against human rights defenders contribute to exacerbating the climate of hostility and intolerance on the part of different sectors of the population, which can lead to an impact on the life and personal integrity of defenders, increasing their vulnerability”
Irregularities in the “summons”
The “summons” notice sent to our General Coordinator lacks formal elements that compromise its validity in accordance with the provisions of the National Constitution and the legislation in force in the country.
Any summons, to be valid, must necessarily comply with strict formal and substantive requirements to ensure its legitimacy and effectiveness in any judicial or administrative process, this is in accordance with the constitutional purpose of guaranteeing respect for due process.
In the case of the “summons” sent to our General Coordinator, it lacks information on the city and date of issue of the notice. Furthermore, it does not have a numerical identification, according to the internal nomenclature of the police station that issued it. Likewise, the document does not identify the official authorized to sign the summons, with his name and position. Nor does it have his signature.
Nowhere does the “summons” indicate that this is an investigation initiated by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which is the competent authority and governing body of the criminal process in Venezuela, and it also does not indicate that the person cited, Mr. Oscar Murillo, has the right to be assisted by a lawyer at all stages and levels of the investigation and process, in accordance with article 49 of the National Constitution.
The “summons” ticket does not indicate the capacity under which our General Coordinator must appear (victim, expert, interpreter or witness), which generates uncertainty and violates the principle of legal certainty of administrative acts, since the alleged “summons” – if valid as the issuer claims – would qualify as an administrative act, but vitiated by nullity.
The legal basis for the alleged summons begins with article 238 of the Criminal Code, which states that “Any individual who, when called by the judicial authority as a witness, expert, doctor, surgeon or interpreter, refuses to appear without justified reason, will be punished with imprisonment from fifteen days to three months…”.
This article refers to the appearance before “the judicial authority as a ”. That is, this article refers to the appearance before a judge. The CICPC is not a judicial authority, it is -in accordance with the Decree with Rank, Force and Value of Law of the Scientific, Criminal and Criminal Investigations Corps- “a criminal investigation body at the exclusive service of the interests of the State and in no case of any person or political group”.
The second legal basis for this alleged summons is article 169 of the Organic Code of Criminal Procedure, from which only part of the text is taken.
This article in its full extension establishes: “The court must issue a summons to the victims, experts, interpreters and witnesses, on the same day that it agrees on the date on which the act for which the appearance of the summoned person is required will be carried out. They must be summoned by the bailiff of the court, by means of a summons. They may also be summoned verbally, by telephone, by email, fax, telegram or any other means of interpersonal communication, which shall be recorded. The persons referred to in this Article may appear spontaneously. The text of the summons or communication shall mention the process to which it refers, place, date and time of appearance and the warning that, if the order is not obeyed, without prejudice to the corresponding criminal liability, the person may be taken by the public force and pay the expenses incurred, except for just cause. If the witness resides in a place far from the seat of the court and does not have the financial means to travel, the necessary arrangements will be made to ensure the appearance.”
The article refers to the summons issued by a court and not by a criminal investigation body. On the other hand, the alleged summons does not indicate that if the “summoned” person – if he or she is a witness – “resides in a place far from the seat of the court and does not have the financial means to travel, the necessary arrangements will be made to ensure the appearance.”
The third legal basis for this alleged summons is Article 212 of the Organic Code of Criminal Procedure (COPP), which states that “If the witness does not appear at the first summons, he or she will be summoned by the public force. If after appearing he or she refuses to testify without the right to do so, this fact will be communicated to the Public Prosecutor’s Office so that it can proceed to conduct the investigation.”
It is important to note that -in the alleged summons notice- a text was added that does not appear in this article of the COPP: “In the text of the notice or communication, mention will be made of the process to which it refers, place, date and time of appearance and the warning that if the order is not obeyed, without prejudice to the corresponding criminal liability, the person may be taken by the public force and pay the expenses incurred, except for just cause.”
We emphasize that one of the consequences of the defect in the summons, which subsumes it in absolute nullity, is found in article 175 of the COPP, when it provides that “or those that imply non-observance or violation of fundamental rights and guarantees provided for in the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, this Code, the laws and the treaties, conventions or international agreements signed and ratified by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.”
To guarantee the formal and material validity of a summons as an accused or witness, it is essential to comply with the established requirements. The summons must respect each of the principles of due process, providing guarantees for both the accused and witnesses.
Committed to our mandate
Despite all the irregularities noted, Oscar Murillo, accompanied by our entire team, will attend this hearing, with the peace of mind that comes from having fulfilled and continuing to fulfill our work and with the moral strength that comes from knowing that defending rights is not a crime and being at the side of the victims, on the ground and in any circumstance that requires it, will continue to be our mandate, faithfully fulfilled for 36 years.
Article 132 of the National Constitution states that “Every person has the duty to fulfill their social responsibilities and participate in solidarity in the political, civil and community life of the country, promoting and defending human rights as the foundation of democratic coexistence and social peace.” Also, the Declaration of Human Rights Defenders of the United Nations stipulates the need to “provide support and protection to human rights defenders in the context of their work.”
In 2024, there have been 592 attacks against human rights defenders in the first half of the year – an increase of 92% compared to the same period in 2023. Provea was one of the main targets, according to the Center for Defenders and Justice.
We emphasize that under no circumstance: threats, harassment or acts of persecution by the Venezuelan authorities will deter Provea from its uninterrupted work of accompanying victims, documenting, investigating and publicly disseminating serious human rights abuses in Venezuela. We will continue, together with the victims, to demand investigation, accountability from those responsible for abuses and helping to preserve memory in order to advance in the construction of a rights regime that provides guarantees of non-repetition of the crimes that have occurred in the present.
Despite the darkness that has marked the last hours of the country, the Venezuelan people will know how to find the light that will definitely guide them towards the recovery of democracy, justice and respect for human dignity.
Finally, those of us who fight for the full validity of Human Rights and a better world have another story to tell and, in that sense, we have no other option than to continue forward.
There is no end point. Dignity is the way!