International

Opponents at the Embassy of Argentina in Venezuela, waiting for a permit that does not arrive

Six Venezuelan opposition members are asylum at the Embassy of Argentina in Caracas waiting for the Government of Venezuela to grant the safe-conducts to leave the country. A possibility classified as mandatory in the Convention on Diplomatic Asylum (1954), but of “limited” application in practice, experts say.

Although the convention says that “the asylum State can request the departure of the asylum seeker for foreign territory,” and expressly indicates that “the State is obliged to give immediately (…) the corresponding safe-conduct.” “Except in case of force majeure” is added, without specifying more, which leaves the door open to different criteria.

For Simón Gómez, professor of International Law at the Andrés Bello Catholic University, “force majeure” is a concept “on which there is a relative general acceptance of its meaning.” It refers to “circumstances resulting from a natural tragedy” that prevent “conferring the safe conduct.”

But the president of the College of Internationalists of Venezuela, Juan Francisco Contreras, told EFE that it must be located in 1954, the year in which the convention was created, when many countries “had military and dictatorial regimes.” So “a kind of window was always left to be able to justify some kind of denial.”

For these reasons, both agree that Venezuela could not argue “force majeure” to deny safe conduct. However, they recall that there are examples of governments that have denied safe conducts citing the article of the convention that states that “it is not lawful to grant asylum” to people who, when requested, “are indicted or prosecuted” before “competent ordinary courts and for common crimes.”

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

A recent example is the case of Ricardo Martinelli, former president of Panama who was in asylum at the Embassy of Nicaragua, whom Justice sentenced to 10 years in prison for money laundering. A conviction that served as an argument for Panama to deny the safe conduct.

The opposite case is that of Pedro Carmona, who, after an unsuccessful coup d’état against Hugo Chávez in 2002, sent to the Colombian Embassy in Caracas. Although he was accused of rebellion, Chávez himself granted a safe-conduct.

“I must say that, in the face of the sovereign decision (…) of the Colombian Government to grant diplomatic asylum to Dr. Carmona (…) in the next few hours I will issue the safe-conduct to leave Venezuela (…). We are obliged from the point of view of International Law,” Chávez said in May 2002.

The Government has not yet confirmed whether it will approve or deny the safe conduct to the opponents, but the vice president of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), Diosdado Cabello – without a charge in the Executive -, assured that he refused.

On May 30, Argentina demanded from Venezuela “the immediate issuance of safe-conducts,” in “compliance” with the 1954 Convention.

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

However, for José Bruzual, professor of Public International Law at the Central University of Venezuela, this case “is not resolved solely with legal criteria.”

“It’s a dilemma from the beginning. The Asylum State has the power to grant asylum, but the territorial State can argue about the nature of the crimes and refuse to grant the safe conduct. In practice, those people can stay there for a long time,” he added.

The six opponents took refuge at the Embassy of Argentina after the Prosecutor’s Office accused them of several crimes, such as conspiracy and treason, among others.

According to the convention, the asylum officer “will take into account” the information of the territorial government on the crimes, but “his determination to continue the asylum or demand the safe conduct for the persecuted will be respected.”

If Venezuela denies the authorization, the convention does not contemplate that any international organization orders the issuance of the permit, so “there is no way to force the country to give the safe conduct,” said expert Contreras.

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

The asylum seekers at the Embassy of Argentina are Pedro Urruchurtu, Magalli Meda, Claudia Macero, Humberto Villalobos – all members of María Corina Machado’s party -, former deputy Omar González and Fernando Martínez Mottola, adviser to the opposition coalition Plataforma Unitaria Democrática.

International

Venezuela Debates Broad Amnesty Law Covering 27 Years of Chavismo

Venezuela’s Parliament began debating on Thursday a sweeping amnesty bill that would cover the 27 years of Chavismo in power, while explicitly excluding serious human rights violations and crimes against humanity.

The proposed legislation, titled the “Amnesty Law for Democratic Coexistence,” was introduced by interim President Delcy Rodríguez, who assumed power following the capture of Nicolás Maduro during a U.S. military operation.

The legislative session was convened for Thursday afternoon, with lawmakers holding an initial discussion focused on the general principles of the bill. This phase precedes a consultation process with civil society, after which the proposal will move to a final debate examining each article individually.

According to a draft of the bill obtained by AFP, the amnesty would apply to individuals accused of crimes such as “treason,” “terrorism,” and “incitement to hatred,” charges that were frequently brought against political prisoners over the past decades. The scope also includes offenses ranging from acts of rebellion to punishments imposed for social media posts or messages sent through private messaging services.

The bill’s explanatory text emphasizes reconciliation, stating that it seeks to move away from “vengeance, retaliation, and hatred” in favor of “opening a path toward reconciliation.”

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

However, the proposal explicitly excludes from its benefits crimes such as “serious human rights violations, crimes against humanity, war crimes, intentional homicide, corruption, and drug trafficking.”

These exclusions, the text notes, are based on strict compliance with the Venezuelan Constitution, which already prohibits granting amnesties or pardons for such offenses.

International

Díaz-Canel Calls for Talks With Washington Without Pressure as U.S. Tightens Oil Sanctions

Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel said on Thursday that his government is willing to engage in dialogue with the United States, provided that talks take place on equal terms and without pressure.

“Cuba is prepared to hold a dialogue with the United States on any issue that either side wishes to discuss,” Díaz-Canel said during a press conference broadcast nationwide on radio and television.

He stressed, however, that such dialogue would only be possible “without pressure, without preconditions, on the basis of equality, and with full respect for our sovereignty, independence, and self-determination.” The Cuban leader added that discussions should avoid issues that could be interpreted as interference in the country’s internal affairs.

Díaz-Canel’s remarks come at a time when Cuba is facing growing pressure from the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, which has implemented a series of measures that have restricted the island’s access to fuel needed to generate electricity.

Washington has sought to prevent Cuba from receiving oil from Venezuela, its main ally for more than two decades, and has stepped up pressure to reduce crude shipments from Mexico. In addition, Trump signed an executive order in late January allowing the United States to impose tariffs on countries that sell oil to Cuba.

20250501_mh_noexigencia_dui_728x90

In that order, the U.S. president declared that Cuba represents an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to U.S. national security and foreign policy, accusing the island of aligning itself with hostile countries and actors.

International

HRW Warns Trump’s Influence Has Weakened Human Rights in Latin America

Human Rights Watch (HRW) warned that the political influence and rhetoric of U.S. President Donald Trump have contributed to a deterioration of human rights conditions across Latin America and the Caribbean. In its World Report 2026, the organization stated that several governments in the region have committed abuses against migrants and citizens, or have used U.S. policies as justification to impose harsher repressive measures.

During the first year of Trump’s new term, HRW observed that multiple countries violated the rights of foreign nationals under direct pressure from Washington. Other governments deepened security strategies based on militarization, mass detentions and excessive use of force, according to the report.

“The impact of the Trump administration has undoubtedly been negative in Latin America and the Caribbean,” said Juanita Goebertus, HRW’s Americas director. However, she emphasized that “governments in the region remain responsible for defending democracy and fundamental rights, regardless of who is in power in Washington.”

HRW also reported that the United States significantly reduced cooperation funding for human rights organizations and independent media. At the same time, countries such as El Salvador, Peru and Ecuador passed laws allowing the arbitrary closure of civil society organizations and media outlets, weakening democratic systems and institutional checks and balances.

The organization further criticized what it described as a “double standard” in U.S. foreign policy, which condemns human rights violations in Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua while overlooking serious abuses committed by allies such as El Salvador, Peru and Ecuador. The report also included criticism of the U.S. military attack against Venezuela in early 2026, warning that it could strengthen Nicolás Maduro’s regime and respond primarily to U.S. political and commercial interests.