AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos
AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos
As Venezuela’s human rights crisis deepens, the U.S. and other international stakeholders have continued to emphasize a need for credible negotiations that can restore Venezuela’s democratic institutions and the rule of law. While this is an important objective, policymakers should also work to ensure that any revived negotiations include a robust and secure channel for civil society actors to engage the process.
Broadly speaking, the recent international response to Venezuela’s crisis has focused on trying to breathe new life into a negotiations framework that began in Mexico City in August 2021, when representatives of the Maduro government and the political opposition signed a memorandum of understanding outlining a seven-point agenda for talks. In this document, the parties committed to discussing the following:
The Venezuelan parties met in Mexico three times from August 13 to September 27 and reached two partial agreements on paper (one ratifying Venezuela’s territorial claim against neighboring Guyana, and another creating a joint board to divert frozen funds to address the humanitarian emergency). But Maduro’s representatives withdrew from the talks in October following the extradition of regime fixer Alex Saab—and the process has been stalled ever since.
In the following months, the international community has been trying to find ways to coax the regime back to the table by offering conditional sanctions relief. The U.S.and other governments have issued statements insisting that a return to the Mexico negotiations include judicial reforms, an end to human rights violations, and the release of political prisoners. But there is one aspect of the Mexico City memorandum that receives less public attention: a commitment from the parties to “establish mechanisms of consultation with other political and social actors.” How exactly this mechanism would be structured was left unclear, but in a September joint statement the negotiating teams said they had discussed making these mechanisms “as inclusive as possible.”
The Benefits of Creating a Robust Civil Society Mechanism
There are a number of reasons why international stakeholders should support the creation of a well-designed, broad, and well-structured consultative process. These include:
Reality Check: Civil Society Under Attack
If implemented well, a mechanism allowing interested civil society actors to participate directly or indirectly could benefit future negotiations between political actors in Venezuela. But it is impossible to discuss civil society involvement in negotiations without recognizing the reality that Venezuela’s government has systematically threatened civil society actors and independent media, silenced dissent, and closed civic space.
The threat of repression looms over Venezuelan civil society. In recent years the government has adopted new regulations which create a legal basis to restrict non-governmental organizations and independent media, and the ruling party has threatened to pass legislation that would effectively criminalize these organizations. Human rights defenders have been attacked and arbitrarily detained—and leading government officials have used the judiciary to attempt to intimidate them into silence. Indeed, the UN Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela has found a reasonable basis to conclude that Venezuelan state actors have carried out crimes against humanity such as systemic extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, arbitrary detentions, and torture, and Maduro government is under investigation for these crimes by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.
For these reasons, Venezuelan civil society actors will need credible guarantees that they will not face reprisals before attempting to impact future negotiations. Venezuela’s authoritarian reality means victims, their family members, victims’ groups, human rights organizations and representatives from other organizations cannot be expected to freely share their concerns and demands for negotiations in public forums or with local authorities. Rather, any mechanism for collecting civil society input will have to demonstrate independence from the government, and an ability to gather and secure sensitive information. This may require a substantial role for United Nations agencies, or even from independent institutions like private universities or the Catholic Church. Some of these same institutions played important roles in advancing the peace process in neighboring Colombia, and may be well-suited to advance civil society engagement in eventual Venezuelan negotiations.