BRV TAKES AIM AT INDEPENDENT CIVIL SOCIETY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 CARACAS 001634 SIPDIS SIPDIS HQSOUTHCOM ALSO FOR POLAD DEPT PASS TO AID/OTI RPORTER COPENHAGEN FOR DLAWTON E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/25/2016 TAGS: PGOV KDEM VE SUBJECT: BRV TAKES AIM AT INDEPENDENT CIVIL SOCIETY REF: A. CARACAS 904 ¶B. 04 CARACAS 3583 Classified By: POLITICAL COUNSELOR ROBERT R. DOWNES FOR 1.4 (D) -------------- Summary -------------- ¶1. (C) Civil Society within Venezuela is raising serious concerns over the potential passage of a law designed to effectively eliminate NGOs in Venezuela as independent bodies (ref a). Embassy shares their concerns that if the law is passed in anything like its currently form it would severely restrict NGO operations and the ability of foreign donors to support humanitarian, human rights and pro-democracy NGOs in Venezuela. The bill -- which could move quickly through the all Chavista assembly -- broadly and vaguely defines international cooperation (read, foreign financing) and creates a new government entity to "manage" cooperation. All groups interested in supporting so-defined international cooperation must register with the body, provide it any and all information on demand and route all funding through that entity. The Embassy has been working with civil society, other diplomatic missions and interested groups to bring domestic and international pressure on the BRV to postpone or modify the legislation. The Embassy has some suggestions regarding a broader outreach strategy. In doing so, it is essential that this be seen as international support for independent civil society within Venezuela. End Summary. -------------- Chavista Focus on Controlling Civil Society -------------- ¶2. (C) The BRV has been focused for some time on bringing independent civil society to heel. A bill to control NGO funding by both domestic and international sources first surfaced in October, 2004. A relatively mild protest by Venezuelan NGOs resulted in the bill being withdrawn. A revised draft surfaced in February 2006, focused only on international funding. USAID/OTI Caracas worked with civil society to organize an event in May to discuss the law. It brought together experts from Colombia and Venezuela along with representatives from about 80 local NGOs. The NGOs took the position that Venezuela did not need a new law because regulation of civil society already existed via the civil registry, tax system, and legislation regarding financial transactions. In addition, the consensus of civil society groups was that the bill was fundamentally an assault on their independence. -------------- New Draft Legislation -------------- ¶3. (C) In late May, Deputy Iris Varela of the National Assembly's Committee on International Relations announced that the Committee intended to finish its work on the draft NGO law and forward it to the Assembly for expeditious consideration, with a first reading as early as June 8. While the draft legislation, styled "Preliminary Draft of the Law on International Cooperation", appears to be a work in progress, neither we nor NGOs here can be sure. If the bill CARACAS 00001634 002 OF 004 follows the pattern of the media regulation law it will be both vague and yet extremely comprehensive, and will be used selectively to intimidate and harass opposition groups, but not enforced across the board. The bill also raises the following concerns: -- it defines broadly "cooperation" to include the transfer of any type of activity, meetings, training, technical assistance, and financial resources; -- it creates a new government agency to manage cooperation and gives the BRV the right to take actions for registration, administration, organization, direction, control, coordination, follow-up and evaluation of civil society (including the right to audit at will and require extensive information on membership, activities and funding sources); -- it creates a Fund for International Cooperation and Assistance which would coordinate international cooperation activities including receiving funds provided to Venezuela by foreign governments and international organizations. This section is vague and it is not clear whether or not all external NGO financing would need to move through this fund, but given the clear intent of the law, this would almost certainly be the case; -- it creates a juridically vague category of "public non-state entities" that encompasses NGOs (both foreign and domestic, including human rights NGOs),unions, universities, as well as business or any other agents engaged in international cooperation; and -- the new government agency will be subject to the direct authority of the President, who can expand and alter its responsibilities through decrees. -------------- Embassy Actions -------------- ¶4. (C) In addition to the Embassy through AID organizing the event noted previously, Ambassador met with G-8 Ambassadors on May 30, where they agreed to raise their concerns over the draft legislation with the BRV. Embassy officers have also been reaching out to other Embassies and civil society members to energize them to raise concerns with the draft legislation. -------------- Civil Society Reacts -------------- ¶5. (C) Encouragingly, Venezuelan civil society appears united and has formulated a swift response. -- Sinergia, a network of over 40 Venezuelan NGOs, hosted a meeting May 30 attended by representatives of 52 organizations which outlined specific concerns over the draft law. Sinergia will work to create a document delineating the specific results of the meeting and will circulate it broadly to raise awareness of the harmful aspects of the legislation. -- Foro Por La Vida, the largest and most respected network CARACAS 00001634 003 OF 004 of human rights NGOs in Venezuela, met May 31. They plan to work with Sinergia to issue a joint program paper which will be circulated to all human rights networks in the region. -- The Canadian Embassy organized a meeting for June 1 attended by representatives of the World Bank, UNDP, and UNHCR, Sinergia, Foro Por la Vida and Paz Activia, as well as the diplomatic missions of Canada, United Kingdom, United States, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany and the European Union. Representatives of Brazil, Chile and Argentina were invited but declined to participate. Diplomatic missions expressed concern that this would interfere with their humanitarian, human rights and pro-democracy activities in Venezuela and violated the principals of international human rights, and they agreed to inform their capitals of their concerns. UNDP committed to writing a letter to the BRV asking how the law would affect Venezuela's international agreements and UNDP's activities. -- Venezuelan NGOs going to the OAS General Assembly in Santo Domingo are planning to lobby other OAS member state missions. They have requested U.S. assistance in back channel sharing of information, particularly with the Brazilian, Argentine, Chilean, Costa Rican and Uruguayan missions, et al, to stress the concerns of Venezuelan civil society with the law. The NGOs that plan to attend include: Consorcio Justicia, Gente de Soluciones, Provea and the Human Rights Center of the Central Venezuelan University. -- The Interamerican Institute for Human Rights in Costa Rica is aware of the law and has expressed its willingness to help Venezuelan NGOs bring the BRV before the Interamerican Commission on Human Rights should the law be enacted. -- Freedom House has also been briefed on the law and is circulating the draft among other Latin American human rights groups. They will be discussing the law during a June 1 USAID-supported training initiative in Venezuela and with 15 Venezuelan journalists. -------------- Possible USG Actions -------------- ¶6. (C) Chavez is working consistently and actively to eliminate, intimidate or control all remaining independent institutions within Venezuela including the press, church and civil society. Whenever and wherever he runs into any sort of opposition, or makes a mistake, he attempts to blame it on others, particularly on the USG. It is therefore critical to accurately characterize U.S. actions to counter the draft law as support for positions developed and being pursued by Venezuelan domestic civil society. With this in mind, there are a number of additional actions that might be taken, such as: -- Corridor discussions at the OAS General Assembly as discussed in paragraph 5; -- A "strong message" to major international non-profits such as Amnesty International, Red Cross/Red Crescent, the ILO, Transparency International, the InterAmerican Development Bank that might be impacted by the legislation; CARACAS 00001634 004 OF 004 -- Development of talking points based on similar legislation enacted in Russia, Belarus and Zimbabwe that outline the harmful impacts and possible international law violations of these sorts of NGO control regimes; -- Demarches to capitals, including the Vatican, of major donor governments and actors supporting pro-democracy, humanitarian and human rights activities within Venezuela; -- Briefing select interested members of Congress on the likely harmful impacts of this legislation; and -- Seeking a letter to the BRV, similar to that previously put forth in favor of Sumate, from international leaders that raises concerns with aspects of this legislation. -------------- Comment -------------- ¶7. (C) Independent NGOs are perceived by the Chavistas as a threat to their rule. This law, like many Bolivarian laws, is a clear attempt to silence a potential adversary. It is another step down the path of criminalizing dissent. It is patently undemocratic because independent civil society is a critical player in functioning democracies. The BRV is extremely serious about taking steps to control NGOs. It is possible that this legislation could be enacted in a matter of days; alternatively if sufficient pressure is engendered, it might, like the media regulation laws and supreme court legislation, be delayed by years. Should it be enacted in anything like its current form it would be a major blow to the relatively robust and independent civil society within Venezuela and sharply restrict our ability to support pro-democracy, humanitarian and human rights activities in this country. WHITAKER