May 8, 2014

Washington, D.C. – El senador estadounidense Marco Rubio (R-FL), miembro de la comisión de Relaciones Exteriores del Senado, abogó hoy por la necesidad de imponer sanciones a las personas responsables por las grotescas violaciones de derechos humanos grotescos que ocurren en la actual crisis política de Venezuela. Durante el comité de audiencia, Rubio enumero los nombres de 23 personas quienes cree son candidatos para estas sanciones.

Rubio es uno de los creadores de la Ley para la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos y Sociedad Civil para Venezuela 2014, la cual autoriza se impongan sanciones a las personas que han participado en graves violaciones de los derechos humanos contra los manifestantes pacíficos en Venezuela.

“Pedimos identificar a los voladores de los Derechos Humanos en Venezuela, nombrarlos por sus nombres y sancionarlos por lo que han hecho. No entiendo cómo podemos sentarnos aquí y decir que debemos esperar que en el futuro llegue el  momento apropiado para hacerlo”, dijo Rubio, “Porque admitiendo esto, lo que estamos diciendo es que, “Si el Gobierno de Venezuela hace ciertas cosa en los próximos meses,” ese día tal vez nunca llegue” Sencillamente no puedo entender como esta puede ser nuestra política de relaciones exteriores.”

“El futuro de Venezuela le pertenece al pueblo de Venezuela. Ellos son los que deben de determinar cuál es la dirección que el país tiene que tomar y  que sistema de gobierno y económico quieren. Pero lo que nosotros también queremos es que ellos entiendan es que Los Estados Unidos no se va a quedar de brazos cruzados, mientras vemos como los derechos de personas, con las cuales compartimos este hemisferio son sistemáticamente violados por un Gobierno anti-americano -para colmo-, e ignorar la situación por la que están pasando”, agrego Rubio.

“Y nos esforzaremos en utilizar, creo y espero que de una manera bipartidista- y sé que así será el caso en este Comité- de manera bipartidista, para usar la influencia y el poder de Los Estados Unidos de América, para firmemente ponernos del lado de todo aquel que aspira a ser libre, por la libertad y el respecto a los Derechos Humanos.”

La transcription de la audiencia esta disponible a continuation: 

Panel #1

Senador Marco Rubio: “El propósito de esta audiencia es la introducción de una ley en el Congreso para sancionar alel Gobierno de Venezuela” y las personas responsables o cómplices de abusos a los derechos humanos cometidas contra su propio pueblo.

Han habido personas asesinadas en Venezuela. Ha habido personas detenidas de manera indefinida en Venezuela. Incluso, mientras hablamos, la audiencia de Leopoldo López ha sido aplazada una vez más por tiempo indefinido. Un joven ha sido sodomizado por fuerzas gubernamentales.  Ha habido mujeres que han sido amenazadas con violación por fuerzas gubernamentales y grupos alineados con el gobierno.

“Lo que estamos hablando aquí son sanciones contra personas responsables de violaciones de derechos humanos. Es típico en estos proceso crear argumentos subterfugios, ‘ Oh, no vamos a enviar nuestras tropas. No vamos a sancionar a la industria petrolera. “El proyecto de ley que hemos presentado no hace nada de eso. Hemos presentado un texto legislativo, y el propósito de esta audiencia es llamar la atención sobre las violaciones de los derechos humanos en Venezuela. Lo que estamos diciendo, es que debemos sancionar a los violadores de los derechos humanos — que por cierto, son personas que viajan a los Estados Unidos con impunidad, compran propiedades en los Estados Unidos, mientras se reíen de nosotros, invierten en nuestros bancos, envían a sus hijos a nuestras escuelas. Ellos tienen cero respeto por este gobierno.

“Lo que he escuchado como repuesta aquí hoy es, “No queremos sancionar a esta gente porque puede unirlos contra nosotros”. Déjenme darles un boletín breve: ya están unidos contra nosotros. Aparte del hecho que cuando vienen aquí a Miami a pasarse el fin de semanapara beneficiarse de nuestra sociedad libre los fines de semana en Miami y luego ir hacia atrás y vivo de su nuevo encontrado millones de millones de dólares han robado al pueblo de Venezuela.  Esto no es una audición sobre sanciones de aceite. No hay ningún proyecto de ley antes para sancionar el petróleo en Venezuela. Este es un proyecto de ley que con suerte vamos a llegar a sancionar a los violadores de los derechos humanos en Venezuela.

“Lo que he oído aquí hoy es, “no debemos sancionar a los violadores de los derechos humanos ya que podemos interrumpir el proceso que se está llevando a cabo en Venezuela.”Bueno, sancionamos a los violadores de los derechos humanos en Rusia. ¿Por qué lo que está pasando en Rusia es más importante de que lo que está pasando en Venezuela? Sancionamos a violadores de derechos humanos todo el tiempo — personal e individualmente. Y tenemos sus nombres. Ni siquiera son difíciles de encontrar ya que estos individuos se jactan y presumen de lo que están haciendo en Venezuela. La única diferencia entre esas sanciones – estas personas – y otras, es que estas se pasan sus fines de semana en Miami. Se pasan sus fines de semana en Florida.

“Sr. Malinowski, Usted en su declaración, habla de Globovisión — que una vez fue una medio de televisión independiente dentro de Venezuela, que cubría noticias ¿Qué le pasó a Globovisión? Se les entrego a los aliados del régimen Maduro y el régimen de Chávez. Ahora es un brazo de la propaganda de Venezuela. ¿Sabe Usted dónde viven? ¿Sabes dónde viven? Ellos viven en Miami. Son dueños de una mansión de varios millones de dólares en Coco Plum, en un barrio muy exclusivo en Miami. Van para arriba y bajo por las calles en sus coches de lujo. Se ríen de Usted, y se ríen de nosotros porque saben que pueden salirse con las suyas.

“Así que supongo, que lo que estoy pidiendo es — Déjeme preguntarle esto: quien en la oposición Venezolana ha pedido no imponer sanciones contra los violadores de los derechos humanos porque podría interrumpir el diálogo? ¿Quién le ha pedido a Ustedes no hacer esto? Hay alguno de Ustedes dentro de la Oposición en Venezuela que ha pedido no imponer sanciones contra los violadores de los derechos humanos

Secretaria Adjunta de Estado, Roberta Jacobson: “Senador, no me siento cómoda sentada aquí dando nombres individuales de personas. Los miembros de […], quienes están participando en el dialogo han discutido esto con nosotros.”

 Rubio: “Esto es lo que Usted me acaba de decir: no se siente cómoda diciéndome sus nombres porque teme por su seguridad. ¿Qué tipo de diálogo es ese? ¿Qué tipo de diálogo es ese, donde las personas involucradas en el diálogo no pueden decirle lo realmente creen? Eso es un falso diálogo.

“Es que ahora la política de los Estados Unidos es, que mientras este diálogo medio funcione nos olvidamos de las violaciones de los derechos humanos? Solo enviamos un mensaje condenándolos pero no haremos nada al respecto?”

Jacobson: “Absolutamente no, y creo que ambos hemos dicho vamos a manifestarnos al respecto, que vamos a hacer declaraciones. Como así también vamos a considerar esas sanciones, tal como dijo el Secretario Adjunto Malinowski, seguiremos considerando las sanciones y las usaremos cuando creemos sea el momento oportuno. De momento creemos que no lo es.”

Rubio: “Es que hay un momento oportuno cuando se trata de violaciones de derechos humanos? En esencia, hay un momento en que las violaciones de los derechos humanos están ‘maduras’?”

Jacobson: “Hay un momento oportuno cuando se trata de la respuesta a una táctica especial sobre las violaciones de los derechos humanos, no nuestra condena –”

Rubio: “Deme un ejemplo, en cual otra parte del mundo, no hemos sancionado las violaciones de los derechos humanos, por no ser el momento oportuno.

Me da un ejemplo cuando los Estados Unidos ha dicho, ‘ sabemos que están violando los derechos humanos, pero no vamos a sancionarlo porque estamos esperando que pase algo mas” Deme un ejemplo, donde usted haya participado y que esto se haya hecho exitosamente Mr. Malinowski.”

Secretario de Estado Adjunto Tom Malinowski: “He mencionado a Birmania como un caso donde nos hemos aplicado sanciones muy eficazmente a través del tiempo. Todavía hay violaciones de derechos humanos en Birmania, pero tenemos un proceso, tenemos un proceso democrático, un proceso de diálogo. Y después de consultar con la oposición, durante los dos últimos años, no hemos continuado poniendo sanciones adicionales, pero permanecemos listos.”

Rubio: “Por qué paso el diálogo en Birmania?”

Malinowski: “En Birmania?”

Rubio: “Sí. Que fue una de las cosas que llevó a que el diálogo tuviera éxito?”

Malinowski: “Como reconocí hace unos momentos, en este caso, lo hizo las sanciones impuestas. Tuvimos una oposición en Birmania que dejó muy pero muy claro que, en ese momento, era importante, útil y eficaz para que los Estados Unidos lo hiciera –

Rubio: “Estoy de acuerdo con lo que dijo. Esto no es un problema de Estados Unidos y Venezuela. Esto es para que el pueblo venezolano decida qué quieren hacer con el futuro de su política. El propósito de nuestra política no es cambiar el gobierno de Venezuela, pese a las afirmaciones de Maduro. Eso no es para que nosotros decidamos, eso es para que el pueblo de Venezuela decida

“Lo que estamos diciendo es que tenemos personas que se benefician enormemente de la economía de Estados Unidos, particularmente en mi estado. Se benefician enormemente de lo que hacen en este país con nuestros bancos, nuestras escuelas, nuestros negocios. Invierten con impunidad a lo largo de Florida y del país. Estas personas también resultan ser violadores de los derechos humanos o los asociados de violadores de derechos humanos y todo lo que estoy diciendo es que debemos sancionarlos por lo que hicieron. Esto no se trata de cambiar el gobierno en Venezuela, eso lo va a decidir el pueblo de Venezuela. Esto se trata de castigar y deshonrar a los individuos responsables de violaciones de derechos humanos.

“Creo en su punto de vista Sr. Malinowski, conozco su reputación. La primera vez que nos conocimos fue en una prisión en Libia. Ahora bien, ninguno de nosotros dos estábamos viviendo ahí, es decir, nos encontramos allí porque estábamos de gira. Pero esto es a lo que Usted ha dedicado su vida. Sé que Usted no está aquí hoy para discutir cómo debemos de mirar hacia el otro lado e imponer sanciones en los Derechos Humanos solo cuando el tiempo sea oportuno.

Malinowski: “En situaciones como estas, las sanciones tienen dos propósitos. Una es la rendición de cuentas. Y hay veces cuando imponemos sanciones a personas que han hecho cosas horribles porque han hecho cosas horribles y porque es lo único que podemos hacer para asegurarnos de que paguen por sus acciones.

“Hay otras veces cuando imponemos sanciones y determinamos el momento oportuno para la imposición de esas sanciones, porque creemos que hay una oportunidad de hacer un tipo de progreso político que ayudara a poner fin a esas violaciones de los derechos humanos. Ahora bien, en un país como Corea del norte, por ejemplo, no existe la más mínima oportunidad de que un proceso político pueda servir para liberar a la gente de los campos de concentración. En una situación como esta, el papel de las sanciones es resaltar el problema e imponer responsabilidades. En Rusia, no hay dialogo.

Rubio: “Lo sé, pero no puedo creer que su posición, teniendo en cuenta su historia, es que Estados Unidos debe ahora – así que ahora, nuestro mensaje al pueblo de Venezuela y a aquellos que han sufrido a manos de opresores brutales, es, ‘ lo siento que fueron sodomizados por la culata de un rifle, pero creemos que, por el bien de tu país, vamos a esperar a imponer sanciones y avergonzar a la gente que cometieron y/o ordenaron estos actos, porque creemos que puede haber algún tipo de diálogo que algún día pueda permitirte tener un periódico libre en Venezuela. ” O, ‘ que creemos que puede que llegue el día en el que técnicamente se te permita protestar libremente en el lugar, hora, forma y manera de tu elección”

“¿Cómo puede ser esta nuestra política? ¿Cómo pueden los Estados Unidos no estar firmemente al lado de personas que se están violando de esta forma sistémica?  No puedo entender que nuestra política exterior se trate de esto. No estamos pidiendo sanciones. No estamos pidiendo un embargo petrolero ni nada de esta naturaleza.”

“Estamos llamando a identificar a los violadores de los derechos humanos en Venezuela, nombrarlos por su nombre y apellido sancionarlos por lo que han hecho. Y no entiendo cómo podemos sentarnos y decir que no es el momento oportuno para hacerlo. No entiendo cómo podemos decir que deberíamos esperar a algún punto en el futuro, cuando el momento tal vez sea el oportuno. Porque admitiéndolo, lo que estamos diciendo es que ‘si el gobierno de Venezuela hace ciertas cosas en los próximos meses.” Ese día nunca llegará. Y sencillamente no puedo entender cómo esta puede ser nuestra política exterior. 

Panel #2 

Rubio: “Quiero resumir cual ha sido su testimonio hoy día aquí. Y eso es en gran medida que: Primero, que es un hecho, que el gobierno, como parte de una estrategia, está violando sistemáticas a los derechos humanos en Venezuela. Segundo, han dicho que no encuentran ninguna objeción, y de hecho, muchos de ustedes han abogado a favor de sanciones contra las personas responsables de estas violaciones de los derechos humanos.”

“Hemos escuchado testimonio del Departamento de estado diciendo que no lo creen es el momento oportuno para hacerlo. Estoy fuertemente en desacuerdo, como creo que lo están la mayoría de los miembros que también estuvieron aquí hoy. Nunca es un mal momento para condenar y sancionar a individuos responsables de violaciones grotescas de derechos humanos. Para finalizar, quería utilizar el tiempo que tengo, para compartir con ustedes los nombres de 23 personas en Venezuela que creo deben de ser nominamos para ese tipo de sanción, basado en las diferentes cosas que se han testificado hoy día aquí por todos Ustedes.  

Rubio: “Esta lista no es de ninguna manera exhaustiva. Es la lista de 23 personas — Si pudiera hoy nombraba a  50 personas. Pero al menos aquí están 23 personas, que hoy quería compartir con Ustedes y los cuales creo deben ser candidatos para las sanciones. Y ciertamente cualquier tipo de sanciones conllevarían fuertes evidencias de lo que estos individuos han sido responsables.

“Y tomaría este momento para terminar, porque sé que esto va ser escuchado por los funcionarios del gobierno en Venezuela. Yo creo que hay gente dentro del gobierno de Venezuela, de hecho sé que hay gente dentro del gobierno de Venezuela, que están bastante incómodas con la dirección que Nicolás Maduro y aquellos que lo rodean están llevando al país— no sólo por las realidades económicas — pero a causa de estas violaciones. Sé que hay oficiales profesionales del ejército dentro de las fuerzas armadas hay que nunca se inscribieron para ser utilizados de esta manera para oprimir a su propio pueblo.

“Y sólo decirle a ellos, que la intención de la política de los Estados Unidos es no interferir en los asuntos internos de ninguna nación. El futuro de Venezuela le pertenece al pueblo de Venezuela. Ellos son los que tienen que  determinar la dirección de ese país, qué tipo de sistema de gobierno y economía que quieren.

Pero lo que nosotros también queremos es que ellos sepan es que Los Estados Unidos no se va a quedar de brazos cruzados, mientras vemos como los derechos de personas, con las cuales compartimos este hemisferio son sistemáticamente violados por un Gobierno anti-americano -para colmo-, e ignorar la situación por la que están pasando”. “Nos esforzaremos en utilizar, creo y espero que de una manera bipartidista- y sé que así será el caso en este Comité- de manera bipartidista, para usar la influencia y el poder de Los Estados Unidos de América, para firmemente ponernos del lado de todo aquel que aspira a ser libre, a la libertad y el respecto a los Derechos Humanos.”

Esa es nuestra intención aquí, rezo y espero que esa sea la dirección que tomemos estas próximas semanas.

For Immediate Release Thursday, May 8, 2014

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, today argued for the need to impose sanctions on individuals responsible for the grotesque human rights violations occurring in the midst of Venezuela’s ongoing political crisis. During the Committee hearing, Rubio listed the names of 23 people he believes are candidates for these sanctions.

Rubio is an original sponsor of the Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014, which authorizes sanctions on people involved in serious human rights violations against peaceful demonstrators in Venezuela.

“We are calling on identifying human rights violators in Venezuela, naming them by name, and sanctioning them for what they’ve done. And I just don’t understand how we can sit here and say that the time isn’t right to do that. I don’t understand how we can say we should wait for some point in the future, when the timing might be right to do that,” Rubio said. “Because by admission, what you’re saying is that, ‘If the Venezuela government does certain things over the next few months.’ That day may never come. And I just don’t understand how that can be our foreign policy.”

“The future of Venezuela belongs to the people of Venezuela. They must determine the direction of that country, and what sort of system of government and economics they want. But what we also want them to understand is that the United States will not stand by and idly watch as the rights of people, with whom we share this hemisphere, are systematically violated by an anti-American government – to top it all off – and ignore their plight,” Rubio added. “And we will endeavor to use, and I think in a bipartisan way I hope – and I know in this Committee that will be the case – in a bipartisan way, to use the influence and the power of the United States of America to firmly line up on the side of those who aspire to liberty, to freedom, and to respect of human rights.”

A transcript of the hearing is available below: 

Panel #1

Senator Marco Rubio: “The purpose of this hearing is that there has been a bill filed in the Congress to sanction individuals related to, and in the government of Venezuela for human rights violations committed against their own people. There have been people murdered in Venezuela. There have been people detained in Venezuela indefinitely. Even as we speak, Leopoldo Lopez, his hearing has once again been indefinitely postponed. There was a young man sodomized in Venezuela by government forces. There have been women that have been threatened – they’ve been threatened to rape them in Venezuela by government forces and those aligned with the government.

“What we are talking about here are sanctions against individuals responsible for human rights violations. It is typical in this process to set up these straw men, ‘Oh, we’re not going to send boots on the ground. We’re not going to sanction the oil industry.’ The bill we have filed does not do any of that. We have filed a piece of legislation, and the purpose of this hearing is to call attention to human rights violations in Venezuela. And what we are saying is we should sanction human rights violators — who by the way, happen to be people that travel to the U.S. with impunity, buy properties in the United States, laugh at us along the way, invest in our banks, send their kids to our school. They have zero respect for this government.

“What I have heard here today in response is, ‘We don’t want to sanction these people because it might unite them against us.’ Let me give you a brief bulletin: They are already united against us. Other than the fact that when they come here to benefit from our free society on weekends in Miami, and then go back and live off their new found millions and billions that they’ve stolen from the people of Venezuela.  This is not a hearing on oil sanctions. There is no bill before us to sanction oil in Venezuela. This is a bill that we are hopefully going to get to, to sanction human rights violators in Venezuela.

“What I have heard today is, ‘We should not sanction human rights violators because it might disrupt the process that is going on in Venezuela.’ Well, we sanctioned human rights violators in Russia. Why is what’s happening in Russia more important than what’s happening in Venezuela? We sanction human rights violators all the time — personally, individually. And we have their names. These aren’t even hard to find. These people brag about what they’re doing in Venezuela. The only difference between those sanctions – those people – and others, is they spend their weekends in Miami. They spend their weekends in Florida.

“Mr. Malinowski, you have in your statement, you talk about Globovision—which was once an independent television operation within Venezuela that actually covered news. What happened to Globovision? It was given over to allies of the Maduro regime and the Chávez regime. It is now a propaganda arm of Venezuela. Do you know where they live? You know where they live? They live in Miami. They own a multi-million dollar mansion in Coco Plum, in a very exclusive neighborhood in Miami. They drive up and down the streets in their fancy cars. They laugh at you, and they laugh at us because they know they can get away with these things.

“So I guess what I’m asking is—let me ask you this: Who in the opposition in Venezuela has asked you not to impose sanctions against human rights violators because it might disrupt the dialogue? Who has asked you not to do that? Either one of you, who has asked you not to impose sanction against human rights violators, among the opposition in Venezuela?”

Assistant Secretary of State Roberta Jacobson: “Senator, I’m just not comfortable sitting here and giving you individual names. Members of the […], who are participating in the dialogue, have discussed this with us.”

Rubio: “This is what you just told me: You’re not comfortable telling me their names because you fear for their safety. What kind of dialogue is that? What kind of dialogue is that, that the people involved in the dialogue can’t tell you what they really believe? That’s a fake dialogue.

“So is it the policy now of the United States that as long as this dialogue is somewhat successful, we’re going to forget the human rights violations? So we’ll just send a statement to condemn them, but we won’t do anything about it?”

Jacobson: “Absolutely not, and I think we’ve both said that we will speak out, we will make statements. But we will also consider those sanctions, as Assistant Secretary Malinowski said, we will keep considering that and we will use those when we think the time is right. We don’t think so right now.”

Rubio: “So there’s a timing element when it comes to human rights violations? In essence, there comes a time when human rights violations are ‘ripe?’”

Jacobson:“There’s a timing element when it comes to the response of a particular tactic on human rights violations, not our condemnation –”

Rubio:“Give me an example where we have held back on human rights violations sanctions because of timing, anywhere else in the world. Give me an example of when the U.S. has said, ‘We know you’ve committed human rights violations, but we’re not going to sanction you because we’re waiting for something else to happen.’ Give me an example of when we’ve done that successfully. Mr. Malinowski, you’ve been involved in this.”

Assistant Secretary of State Tom Malinowski: “I mentioned Burma as a case where we’ve applied sanctions very effectively over time. There are still human rights violations going on in Burma, but we have a process, we have a democratic process, a process of dialogue. And in consultation with the opposition, we have not continued to impose additional targeted sanctions over the last couple of years, but remain ready to.”

Rubio: “Why did the dialogue happen in Burma?”

Malinowski: “In Burma?”

Rubio: “Yeah. What was one of the things that led to the dialogue being successful?”

Malinowski: “As I acknowledged a few moments ago, sanctions in that case did. We had an opposition in Burma that made very, very clear that, at that point, it was important, and useful and effective for the United States to –”

Rubio: “I agree with what you said. This is not a U.S.-Venezuela issue. This is for the Venezuelan people to decide what they want to do with the future of their politics. The purpose of our policy here is not to change the government of Venezuela, despite Maduro’s claims. That’s not for us to decide, that’s for the people of Venezuela to decide.

“What we’re saying is we have individuals that benefit greatly from the economy of the United States, particularly in my state. They benefit greatly from what they do in this country with our banks, our schools, our businesses. They invest with impunity throughout Florida and the country. These people also happen to be human rights violators or the associates of human rights violators, and all I’m saying is we should sanction them for what they did. This is not about changing the government in Venezuela, that’s for the Venezuelan people to decide. This is about punishing and shaming individuals responsible for human rights violations.

“And I guess, to your point Mr. Malinowski, I know your reputation. The first time we met was in a prison in Libya. Now, we weren’t living there, either one of us, I mean, we met there as we were touring it. But this is what you’ve dedicated your life to. I know you’re not here today to argue that we should somehow look the other way on human rights sanctions until the appropriate time.”

Malinowski: “Sanctions serve two purposes in a situation like this. One is accountability. And there are times when we impose sanctions on people who have done horrible things because they have done horrible things and because it’s the only thing we can do to make sure that they pay a price.

“There are other times when we impose sanctions and we determine the timing of the imposition of sanctions because we think there is a chance to make the kind of political progress that will end those human rights violations. Now in a country like North Korea, for example, there isn’t a scintilla of a chance that I see a political progress that’s going to free people from concentration camps. In a situation like that, the role of sanctions is to highlight the problem and to impose accountability. In Russia, there’s no dialogue.”

Rubio: “I know, but I can’t believe that your position, given your history, is that the United States must now – so now, our message to the people of Venezuela, and to those who have suffered at the hands of these brutal oppressors, is, ‘I’m so sorry that you were sodomized by the butt of a rifle, but we think, for the sake of your country, that we’re going to hold off shaming the people and sanctioning the people responsible for ordering that, because we think there might be some sort of dialogue that may one day allow you to own one newspaper that is free in Venezuela.’ Or, ‘We think there might be a day when you might technically allow them to let you protest somewhere at a time of their choosing and of their way.’

“How can that be our policy? How can the United States not firmly be on the side of people who are being violated in this systemic way?  I just don’t understand how our foreign policy can be about that. We’re not asking for sanctions. We’re not calling for an oil embargo, or anything of that nature.

“We are calling on identifying human rights violators in Venezuela, naming them by name, and sanctioning them for what they’ve done. And I just don’t understand how we can sit here and say that the time isn’t right to do that. I don’t understand how we can say we should wait for some point in the future, when the timing might be right to do that. Because by admission, what you’re saying is that ‘If the Venezuela government does certain things over the next few months.’ That day may never come. And I just don’t understand how that can be our foreign policy.” 

Panel #2 

Rubio: “I want to summarize what your testimony has been here today. And that is largely that, in fact, there are systemic human rights violations happening within Venezuela on behalf of the government as a part of a strategy. Number two, you’ve stated that you do not find an objection, and in fact, many of you have advocated in favor of targeted sanctions against individuals responsible for these human rights violations.

“We’ve heard testimony from the State Department saying that they don’t think it’s the right time to do it. I strongly disagree, as I think most of the members that were here today would as well. It is never the wrong time to condemn and sanction individuals responsible for grotesque human rights violations. And to that end, I wanted to use my time here today to share with you the names of 23 individuals in Venezuela who I think we should nominate for that sort of sanction, based on many of the different things that you have all testified here today, and others.… 

Rubio: “That list is by no means comprehensive. It is the list of 23 people—I would list 50 people, if I could today. But at least 23 people, that today I wanted to share with you and everyone that I believe should be candidates for sanctions. And certainly any sort of sanctions would carry with them strong evidence of what these individuals have been responsible for.

“And I would just close by taking this moment, because I know that this will be listened to by government officials in Venezuela. I do believe that there are people within the government of Venezuela, in fact I know there are people within the government of Venezuela, that are quite uncomfortable with the direction that Nicolás Maduro and those around him have taken this country — not just because of the economic realities — but because of these violations. I know that there are professional military officers within the armed forces there that never signed up to be used as a way to oppress their own people.

“And I would just say to them that the intention of the policy of the United States is not to interfere in the internal affairs of any nation. The future of Venezuela belongs to the people of Venezuela. They must determine the direction of that country, and what sort of system of government and economics they want. But what we also want them to understand is that the United States will not stand by and idly watch as the rights of people, with whom we share this hemisphere, are systematically violated by an anti-American government – to top it all off – and ignore their plight. And we will endeavor to use, and I think in a bipartisan way I hope – and I know in this Committee that will be the case – in a bipartisan way, to use the influence and the power of the United States of America to firmly line up on the side of those who aspire to liberty, to freedom, and to respect of human rights. And that’s our intention here, and I pray and hope that, that’s the direction we will go in the weeks to come.”

Short title

This Act may be cited as the  Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014 .

2.

Findings

Congress makes the following findings:

(1)

The Central Bank of Venezuela and the National Statistical Institute of Venezuela have stated that the inflation rate in Venezuela was 56.30 percent in 2013, the highest level of inflation in the Western Hemisphere and the third highest level of inflation in the world behind South Sudan and Syria.

(2)

The Central Bank of Venezuela and the Government of Venezuela have imposed a series of currency controls that has exacerbated economic problems and, according to the World Economic Forum, has become the most problematic factor for doing business in Venezuela.

(3)

The Central Bank of Venezuela and the National Statistical Institute of Venezuela have declared that the scarcity index of Venezuela reached 28 percent in December 2013, which signifies that one in 4 basic goods is unavailable at any given time.

(4)

Since 1999, violent crime in Venezuela has risen sharply and the Venezuelan Violence Observatory, an independent nongovernmental organization, found the national per capita murder rate to be 79 per 100,000 people in 2013.

(5)

The international nongovernmental organization Human Rights Watch recently stated, Under the leadership of President Chàvez and now President Maduro, the accumulation of power in the executive branch and the erosion of human rights guarantees have enabled the government to intimidate, censor, and prosecute its critics..

(6)

The Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2013 of the Department of State maintained that in Venezuelathe government did not respect judicial independence or permit judges to act according to the law without fear of retaliation and the government used the judiciary to intimidate and selectively prosecute political, union, business, and civil society leaders who were critical of government policies or actions.

(7)

The Government of Venezuela has detained foreign journalists and threatened and expelled international media outlets operating in Venezuela, and the international nongovernmental organization Freedom House declared that Venezuela’s media climate is permeated by intimidation, sometimes including physical attacks, and strong antimedia rhetoric by the government is common.

(8)

Since February 4, 2014, the Government of Venezuela has responded to antigovernment protests with violence and killings perpetrated by public security forces, and by arresting and unjustly charging opposition leader Leopoldo Lopes with criminal incitement, conspiracy, arson, and intent to damage property.

(9)

As of March 13, 2014, 23 people had been killed, more than 100 people had been injured, and dozens had been unjustly detained as a result of antigovernment demonstrations throughout Venezuela.

3.

Sense of Congress regarding antigovernment protests in Venezuela and the need to prevent further violence in Venezuela

It is the sense of Congress that—

(1)

the United States aspires to a mutually beneficial relationship with Venezuela based on respect for human rights and the rule of law and a functional and productive relationship on issues of public security, including counternarcotics and counterterrorism;

(2)

the United States supports the people of Venezuela in their efforts to realize their full economic potential and to advance representative democracy, human rights, and the rule of law within their country;

(3)

the chronic mismanagement by the Government of Venezuela of its economy has produced conditions of economic hardship and scarcity of basic goods and foodstuffs for the people of Venezuela;

(4)

the failure of the Government of Venezuela to guarantee minimal standards of public security for its citizens has led the country to become one of the most violent in the world;

(5)

the Government of Venezuela continues to take steps to remove checks and balances on the executive, politicize the judiciary, undermine the independence of the legislature through use of executive decree powers, persecute and prosecute its political opponents, curtail freedom of the press, and limit the free expression of its citizens;

(6)

the people of Venezuela, responding to ongoing economic hardship, high levels of crime and violence, and the lack of basic political rights and individual freedoms, have turned out in demonstrations in Caracas and throughout the country to protest the inability of the Government of Venezuela to ensure the political and economic well-being of its citizens; and

(7)

the repeated use of violence perpetrated by the National Guard and security personnel of Venezuela, as well as persons acting on behalf of the Government of Venezuela, in relation to the antigovernment protests that began on February 4, 2014, is intolerable and the use of unprovoked violence by protesters is also a matter of serious concern.

4.

United States policy toward Venezuela

It is the policy of the United States—

(1)

to support the people of Venezuela in their aspiration to live under conditions of peace and representative democracy as defined by the Inter-American Democratic Charter of the Organization of American States;

(2)

to work in concert with the other member states within the Organization of American States, as well as the countries of the European Union, to ensure the peaceful resolution of the current situation in Venezuela and the immediate cessation of violence against antigovernment protestors;

(3)

to hold accountable government and security officials in Venezuela responsible for or complicit in the use of force in relation to the antigovernment protests that began on February 4, 2014, and similar future acts of violence; and

(4)

to continue to support the development of democratic political processes and independent civil society in Venezuela.

5.

Sanctions on persons responsible for violence in Venezuela

(a)

In general

The President shall impose the sanctions described in subsection (b) with respect to any person, including a current or former official of the Government of Venezuela or a person acting on behalf of that Government, that the President determines—

(1)

has perpetrated, or is responsible for ordering, controlling, or otherwise directing, significant acts of violence or serious human rights abuses in Venezuela against persons associated with the antigovernment protests in Venezuela that began on February 4, 2014;

(2)

has directed or ordered the arrest or prosecution of a person primarily because of the person’s legitimate exercise of freedom of expression or assembly; or

(3)

has materially assisted, sponsored, or provided significant financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services in support of, the commission of acts described in paragraph (1) or (2).

(b)

Sanctions described

(1)

In general

The sanctions described in this subsection are the following:

(A)

Asset blocking

The exercise of all powers granted to the President by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) to the extent necessary to block and prohibit all transactions in all property and interests in property of a person determined by the President to be subject to subsection (a) if such property and interests in property are in the United States, come within the United States, or are or come within the possession or control of a United States person.

(B)

Exclusion from the United States and revocation of visa or other documentation

In the case of an alien determined by the President to be subject to subsection (a), denial of a visa to, and exclusion from the United States of, the alien, and revocation in accordance with section 221(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act ( 8 U.S.C. 1201(i) ), of any visa or other documentation of the alien.

(2)

Penalties

A person that violates, attempts to violate, conspires to violate, or causes a violation of paragraph (1)(A) or any regulation, license, or order issued to carry out paragraph (1)(A) shall be subject to the penalties set forth in subsections (b) and (c) of section 206 of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act ( 50 U.S.C. 1705 ) to the same extent as a person that commits an unlawful act described in subsection (a) of that section.

(3)

Exception to comply with united nations headquarters agreement

Sanctions under paragraph (1)(B) shall not apply to an alien if admitting the alien into the United States is necessary to permit the United States to comply with the Agreement regarding the Headquarters of the United Nations, signed at Lake Success June 26, 1947, and entered into force November 21, 1947, between the United Nations and the United States, or other applicable international obligations.

(c)

Waiver

The President may waive the application of sanctions under subsection (b) with respect to a person if the President—

(1)

determines that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States; and

(2)

on or before the date on which the waiver takes effect, submits to the Committee on Foreign Relations and theCommittee on Banking Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs and theCommittee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives a notice of and justification for the waiver.

(d)

Regulatory authority

The President shall issue such regulations, licenses, and orders as are necessary to carry out this section.

(e)

Definitions

In this section:

(1)

Admitted; alien

The terms admitted and alien have the meanings given those terms in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101).

(2)

Financial institution

The term financial institution has the meaning given that term in section 5312 of title 31, United States Code.

(3)

Materially assisted

The term materially assisted means the provision of assistance that is significant and of a kind directly relevant to acts described in paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (a).

(4)

United states person

The term United States person means—

(A)

a United States citizen or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence to the United States; or

(B)

an entity organized under the laws of the United States or of any jurisdiction within the United States, including a foreign branch of such an entity.

6.

Support for civil society in Venezuela

(a)

In general

The Secretary of State shall, subject to the availability of appropriations, directly or through nongovernmental organizations—

(1)

defend internationally recognized human rights for the people of Venezuela;

(2)

build the organizational and operational capacity of democratic civil society activists and organizations in Venezuela at the national and regional level;

(3)

support the efforts of independent media outlets to broadcast, distribute, and share information beyond the limited channels made available by the Government of Venezuela;

(4)

facilitate open and uncensored access to the Internet for the people of Venezuela;

(5)

improve transparency and accountability of institutions that are part of the Government of Venezuela;

(6)

provide support to civil society organizations, activists, and peaceful demonstrators in Venezuela that have been targeted for exercising internationally recognized civil and political rights, as well as journalists targeted for activities related to the work of a free press; and

(7)

provide support for democratic political organizing and election monitoring in Venezuela.

(b)

Strategy requirement

Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit a strategy to carry out the activities described in subsection (a) to—

(1)

the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives; and

(2)

the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

(c)

Authorization of appropriations

(1)

In general

There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of State $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2015 to carry outsubsection (a) . Amounts appropriated for the activities set forth in subsection (a) shall be used pursuant to the authorization and requirements contained in this section. Additional amounts may be authorized to be appropriated under provisions of law.

(2)

Notification requirement

(A)

In general

Funds appropriated or otherwise made available pursuant to paragraph (1) may not be obligated until until 15 days after the date on which the President has provided notice of intent to obligate such funds to—

(i)

the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives; and

(ii)

the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

(B)

Waiver

The President may waive the requirement under subparagraph (A) if the President determines that failure to waive that requirement would pose a substantial risk to human health or welfare, in which case notification shall be provided as early as practicable, but in no event later than 3 days after taking the action to which such notification requirement was applicable in the context of the circumstances necessitating such waiver.