Advancing Re-Inter-Americanization for Venezuela: Toward a Gender-Sensitive Democratic Reconstruction

This blog post was translated from the original Spanish version by using AI tools.
If you encounter any errors, please contact us.

The discussion regarding the paths and standards for a transition in Venezuela continues to raise various questions: Is Venezuela truly moving toward a democratic transition? Is it sufficient to discuss transition in the terms that the experiences of other countries have shown us? Continuing to explore these questions is a collective effort that draws on diverse expertise, particularly from academia—in Venezuela, as well as at the regional and global levels. There is one question that continues to have the same answer, yet still lacks the prominence it deserves: Can we speak of transition or reconstruction in Venezuela in neutral terms? The answer is no. In this article on the human rights situation of women—an issue that cannot be postponed in any eventual transitional justice process—Julie Guillerot and I offered preliminary reflections on this matter. In this blog post, we share additional notes to emphasize this point.

The Roadmap for Re-Inter-Americanization with a Gender Perspective

As Mariela Morales and Edward Pérez point out in this post, democratic reconstruction in Venezuela is a regional challenge, and, with that in mind, devising a roadmap centered on re-Inter-Americanization is the main proposal that has been taking shape through the Ius Constitutionale Commune in Latin America (ICCAL).

The article mentioned above addressed the task of outlining how a gender dimension could be integrated into a transitional justice process in Venezuela, using the findings and recommendations of international human rights organizations regarding the situation of women, girls, and adolescents as a starting point. This was proposed precisely as a roadmap to address some of the most representative situations within the broader landscape of women’s rights in Venezuela—a minimum standard that should be non-negotiable in any transitional process.

In this regard, the proposal for “re-Inter-Americanization,” as a framework for Venezuela’s reconstruction, should have as a central and priority focus the fulfillment of the Venezuelan State’s obligations regarding women’s right to live a life free from violence and discrimination. It is important to recall that the obligations Venezuela has assumed in this area—specifically under specialized international treaties such as the Belém do Pará Convention and the CEDAW Convention, while considering the Universal System as a complementary and necessary contribution to this discussion—remain fully in force. However, despite the fact that these are reinforced obligations, the dismantling of institutions and the rule of law in Venezuela has undermined them.

The measures to prevent recurrence ordered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in its landmark ruling in the López Soto et al. case, as well as the specific recommendations issued by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the findings of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (MII), regarding the situation of women’s rights in Venezuela, remain urgent matters that require attention. Furthermore, it is important to bear in mind that they are clearly linked to the discussion on the restoration of institutional frameworks and democracy.

Continuing to deepen the hybrid model in relation to the gender approach

In the article co-authored with Julie Guillerot, we also argue that framing the gender perspective within a potential transition process in Venezuela should integrate at least two approaches—or what we refer to as a hybrid model. This entails both “the incorporation of a cross-cutting gender analysis that takes into account the differentiated impacts on patterns of systematicity and the serious human rights violations analyzed”, as well as the “concrete incorporation of specific acts of violence—for example, sexual violence—as serious human rights violations committed particularly against women and girls.”

In this regard, there is a significant challenge that remains relevant and is worth revisiting. While there is an assessment that highlights what was mentioned above as representative situations of the landscape of women’s rights in Venezuela, the truth is that this analysis remains incomplete. This is because, even within international human rights mechanisms, the incorporation of a gender perspective to analyze the case of Venezuela has not always been consistent.

In this regard, it is essential that the academic community’s engagement with this discussion in Venezuela also aim to formulate concrete proposals on what “re-Inter-Americanization” can contribute to this differentiated approach, what questions the regional human rights framework needs to bring to the discussion—taking into account this hybrid model of analysis and from the perspective of the reinforced obligations already mentioned regarding women’s right to a life free from violence and discrimination. Coordination with the mechanisms already mentioned, as well as others such as MESECVI (the Mechanism for Monitoring the Belém do Pará Convention), should be part of this concrete agenda.

Similarly, the developments that have been taking place within the framework of other experiences—such as Colombia’s—and regarding the conceptualization of specific forms of gender-based violence, such as reproductive violence, are areas where it is also emphasized that further exploration is needed. The case of Venezuela highlights the need to move beyond a perspective limited solely to civil and political rights and to include violations of economic, social, and cultural rights as well; hence, it is important to consider these developments. To offer a few specific examples for discussion, it is worth noting that both the CEDAW Committee’s latest review of Venezuela and the reports of the IACHR have referred to measures implemented by the Venezuelan government, such as the “practice of forced sterilizations”, as an irreversible method offered specifically to women of reproductive age, “periodically, in a coordinated manner, free of charge, and on a nationwide scale”, in the context of the collapse of the health care system and the severe impacts on sexual and reproductive rights as one of the distinct consequences of the complex humanitarian emergency. The MII has also cited cases of incarcerated women who suffered miscarriages as a result of torture endured during their detention.

An additional comment: the reconstruction plan also requires a gender-sensitive approach

The case of Venezuela poses multiple challenges. How to restore democracy and the rule of law in a context of authoritarian co-optation is one of the many questions that academia continues to reflect upon. Undoubtedly, the push for re-Inter-Americanization in Venezuela involves addressing the restoration of the justice system and its independence. This discussion must also take into account what access to justice means for women, and what the reconstruction of the justice system requires to guarantee its independence from this perspective.

Insights into this question are also essential because the erosion of the justice system in Venezuela has not only played a key role in crimes and practices of state terrorism but has also enabled a grave situation of institutional violence in which women who are victims of gender-based violence—exacerbated in the current context—may in turn be subjected to persecution on the grounds of gender-based discrimination. While these cases are not directly related to patterns such as political persecution, they do demonstrate that the lack of independence and impartiality in Venezuela’s judiciary has a clear and disproportionate impact.

Given that the Venezuelan justice system is now a direct contributor to the historical discrimination faced by women, “the persistence of patriarchal attitudes and [gender] stereotypes” that have severely permeated its practices and responses must also be a central aspect of the discussion regarding its restoration.