U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureaus of Justice Statistics WORLD FACTBOOK OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMS BJS chief editor, Carolyn C. Williams Venezuela NCJ 199277 Christopher Birkbeck Section I: GENERAL OVERVIEW 1. Brief History. Venezuela is a democratic republic, with an estimated population (2001) of 24.6 million people (OCEI, 2000). It attained formal independence from Spain in 1830 and was largely ruled by autocrats until 1958, when democratic movements ousted the military President Marcos Pérez Jiménez. During the 19th century, Venezuela's economy was overwhelmingly agrarian, relying principally on exports of cocoa and coffee. The discovery and exploitation, starting in 1907 (Fundación Polar, 1988:130), of rich petroleum reserves around Lake Maracaibo marked the transition to an oil-based economy, which was favored by the discovery of other large reserves in the east of the country and in the River Orinoco basin. Although Venezuela has considerable natural resources (agricultural, hydrological, iron ore, aluminum and gold), the economy is still largely sustained by oil revenues, which currently account for about 33% of the GDP, 80% of export earnings, and more than 50% of governmental revenues. During the second half of the 20th century, the country experienced rapid modernization, with the development of manufacturing and the movement of population from rural to urban areas. In 2000, 87% of the population was estimated to live in settlements of more than 2,500 population. The capital Caracas, had an estimated population in 2000 of 2.3 million (OCEI, 2000). 2. Legal System. Venezuela's legal system was historically influenced by the European civil law tradition, which greatly emphasizes the enactment of legislation in the form of codes. Legislation contains strong elements of idealism and therefore performs important symbolic functions, particularly for national and group identity. For example, the country has adopted 23 constitutions since the first moves toward independence from Spain in 1811. The most recent constitution was adopted in 1999 to mark the transition from the Fourth to the Fifth Republic, that is, from a supposedly "party-dominated" democracy to "popular" democracy. Idealism may foster impracticality, such that there exist wide breaches between law and reality. Additionally, codification encourages formalism, which often results in slow and cumbersome legal procedures. The backbone of criminal legislation is found in the Penal Code, enacted in 1926 and partially modified in 1964 and 2000 (Venezuela, 1964; 2000a). This code is based on 19th century Spanish and Italian penal codes of classical orientation. Crimes are systematically defined and punishments are calibrated in terms of their seriousness, without reference to the personality of the offender (Arteaga, 1985). The existence of this Penal Code, basically unchanged for more than 70 years, has resulted in ever greater lacunae, as changing social mores, economic activities, and criminal organization have produced new forms of crime (for example, drug and computer crimes) that need to be defined and sanctioned. The several attempts to reform the Penal Code during the latter half of the 20th century have not met with success, and these problems have been addressed by separate laws, devoted to specific kinds of crime. Notable are the Anti-Corruption Law (Venezuela, 1982), the Drug Law (Venezuela, 1984; 1993a), the Environmental Crimes Law (Venezuela, 1992), and the Law on Violence Against Women and the Family (Venezuela, 1998a). A proposed law on organized crime has yet to be enacted (Chuecos, 2001). In addition, certain provisions of the Penal Code are anachronistic. For example, adultery is still defined as a crime, although morality regarding sexual behavior has changed. Similarly, inflation (particularly pronounced in the late 1980s and early 1990s) has reduced to absurdly low real values the monetary amounts used to classify certain property crimes and to set fines. A partial reform of the Penal Code was enacted in 2000 to bring it in line with the 1999 Constitution by including the crime of forced disappearance (Venezuela, 2000a). In July 2001, a comprehensive revision and update of the Penal Code was proposed by criminal lawyers (López, 2001). Until 1999, criminal procedure was inquisitorial, formalist, and written (Venezuela, 1962). On July 1, 1999, a Criminal Procedure Code took effect which represented nothing short of a paradigm shift for the Venezuelan criminal justice system (Venezuela, 1998b). The inquisitorial system was replaced by an adversarial system, characteristic of common law countries, based on oral proceedings, the right to trial by jury, the possibility of pre-trial diversion, and a modest role for plea bargaining (Pérez, 1998). The Criminal Procedure Code also placed heavy restrictions on the detention of crime suspects by the police and on the use of preventive detention measures while adjudication proceeds. These radical changes in criminal procedure met with considerable opposition from some groups, notably the police and some elected officials who argued that the Code was "soft" on criminals (Poleo, 2000). As a result, the Criminal Procedure Code has been partially modified, for example, by decreasing restrictions on preventive detention (Venezuela, 2000b), and further changes are proposed (Casas, 2001). 3. Political System Since 1958 Venezuela has been a federal democratic republic. Following a period of abundance during the late 1970s and early 1980s based on high international oil prices, the economy faltered in 1983. Continuing economic problems, together with a widespread perception of corruption and mismanagement in government, fueled the discontent that prompted two failed military coups in 1992. A leader of the first coup, Hugo Chávez Frías, was subsequently swept into power with a huge margin of popular support in the presidential elections of 1998. Chávez vowed to set Venezuela on a new course and was the driving force behind the constitution that came into effect at the end of 1999 (Venezuela, 1999). Under the Bolivarian Constitution, government is hierarchically organized. At the lowest level are the municipalities, with elected mayors and municipal councils. The municipalities oversee urban planning, local commerce and industry, and sanitation. Some of the larger municipalities also have their own police forces. At the intermediate level is state government. The country is divided into 23 states, each with an elected governor and legislative council. Each state has a uniformed police force, which is partly regulated by the local Police Code. This level of government also includes the Capital District (centered on Caracas) and a federal dependency of 11 island groups (with a total of 72 islands). Finally, there is the national government, which is based in Caracas. National government is divided into five branches: legislative, executive, judicial, citizen, and electoral. Legislative power is vested in a single-chamber National Assembly with 165 representatives. Executive power is exercised by the President, Vice-President, and Council of Ministers. The Judiciary, including judges, prosecutors, and public defenders, is headed by the Supreme Court (Tribunal Supremo). The Citizens´ branch is defined as the "moral power" of government and comprises the Ombudsman (Defensor del Pueblo), the Attorney General and the Comptroller. Two important functions of this moral power are the defense of human rights and investigations into governmental corruption. Although the constitution declares Venezuela to be a "federal decentralized state," the major institutions of criminal justice (judicial police, courts, prisons) belong to the national government. States and municipalities can create their own uniformed police forces, but there are proposals to merge these into a single national force. Many state governments have also been granted limited responsibilities for prisons located within their jurisdictions, although they have not yet taken significant action on prison matters. Municipalities may also name Justices of the Peace, a relatively new program that has not been implemented in most of the country. Section II: CRIME 1. Classification of Crimes. A. General legal classification of crime The Venezuelan Penal Code distinguishes between crimes, punishable by imprisonment, and misdemeanors (faltas), punishable by arrests or fines. In the Penal Code, crimes are classified by major types, as follows: * crimes against national sovereignty and national security -- treason; crimes against national and state government; crimes against international law * crimes against liberty -- crimes against political, personal, religious freedom, etc. * corruption -- these are defined in a special anti-corruption law, enacted in 1982 (Venezuela, 1982) * crimes against the administration of justice -- simulating crimes, false testimony, collusion, concealment, etc. * crimes against public order -- conspiracy to commit crime; incitement to crime; manufacture and carrying of weapons, etc. * forgery -- false currency; forged seals, fiscal stamps, documents, passports, licenses, etc. * crimes against public and private interests -- arson, causing floods, etc. against public health and nutrition * crimes against public morals and the family -- rape, seduction, prostitution, corrupting minors, adultery, bigamy, etc. * crimes against persons -- homicide, battery, abortion, abandoning children, slander, etc. * crimes against property -- theft, robbery, extortion, kidnaping, fraud, etc. Drug and environmental crimes are defined in separate laws (Venezuela, 1984; 1992;1993a). Misdemeanors are divided into -- * public order -- for example, failure to obey an order, begging, disorderly behavior * public safety -- proper manufacture and sale of arms; faulty construction practices; illegal elimination of waste materials; etc. * public morals -- betting and gaming, insobriety, offenses to public decency, etc. * public protection of property -- for example, unlawful possession of weights and measures; unlawful copying of keys. State police codes also include many of the same misdemeanors, that are similarly punishable by arrest or fine. B. Age of criminal responsibility. Until 1998, the age of criminal responsibility was 18. In that year, a new Children's Code (Venezuela, 1998c) established criminal responsibility for adolescents (ages 12 to 17). However, the adolescent criminal justice system is administratively separate from the adult criminal justice system. Adolescents who turn 18 during adjudication or sentencing continue under the adolescent justice system. C. Drug offenses. The principal activities defined as crimes in the Drug Law (Venezuela, 1984; 1993a) are as follows: * trafficking, distribution, supply, manufacture, preparation, refining, alteration, extraction, preparation, production, transport, storage, organization, financing or aiding in the trafficking of substances or raw materials prohibited by the law * planting, cultivation, harvesting, preservation, storage, organization or financing, and in general, any illicit act of acquisition, trafficking, supply, storage and distribution of seeds, plants, or parts of plants, that contain any of the substances prohibited by the law * illegal possession of substances, raw materials, seeds, plants, or parts of plants that contain any of the substances prohibited by the law * laundering money derived from drug offenses * providing drugs to a minor * providing a vehicle or premises for drug use * incitement to drug use. Substances under the purview of this law are (Maldonado and Gaviria, 2000): a) those listed in international agreements and ratified by Venezuelan law, such as the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotics, 1961 (Venezuela, 1968); the Convention on Psychotropic Substances, 1971 (Venezuela, 1972); and the Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances, 1988 (Venezuela, 1991); b) any other substance defined as narcotic or psychotropic in resolutions issued by the Venezuelan Ministry of Health. The law creates a conceptual distinction between drug users and persons involved in the production, distribution, possession, and sale of drugs. The former are sentenced to treatment, while the latter are punished. However, a study of the application of this law between 1984 and 1988 found that many people sentenced for drug possession, actually had such small amounts of the drug that they should have been considered drug users (Borrego and Rosales, 1992). A 1993 reform (Venezuela, 1993a) setting the amounts of substances corresponding to specific types of drug crime seems to have done little to diminish criticism (Rosales, 1996). 2. Crime Statistics Official statistics on crime are compiled by the Judicial Police (Cuerpo Técnico de Policía Judicial, or PTJ), the detective force attached to the Ministry of the Interior and Justice. The data are based on crime reports made by citizens at PTJ offices throughout the country. It should be noted that citizens also report crimes to other agencies, especially the uniformed state or municipal police. Estimates from victim surveys conducted in the cities of Caracas and Mérida indicate that between 20% and 30% of reports are directed to agencies other than the PTJ (Birkbeck, 1992), and there is no mechanism for centralizing all crime reports in one agency. Thus, PTJ figures on reported crime represent the majority of, but not all, cases known to the police. Many crimes, particularly the less serious ones, are not reported to any agency. Victim survey data show that the proportion of thefts, robberies, and batteries reported to the police varies from 17% to 28%, depending upon crime type, city, and survey (Birkbeck, 1992). The data show the number, and rate per 100,000 inhabitants, of crimes reported to the Judicial Police between 1986 (for some crimes 1990) and 2000 throughout the country and in the Caracas Metropolitan Area ((which is distinct from, and smaller than, the Capital District) tables 1 to 7). The reports include both attempted and completed crimes. Definitions of individual crime types are also provided. 2.1 Regional Variations Property crime has consistently accounted for the greater share of reported crimes (70% in 2000) rather than offenses against the person (22%). While property crime rates for years have been highest in urban areas, the same has not always been true for crimes against the person. Until the 1960s, homicide and battery rates were much higher in rural areas, and high rates for these crimes persisted in remoter areas until well into the 1970s (Gómez Grillo, 1979). Since that time, rates for crimes against the person have decreased in rural areas and increased in urban areas. Thus rates for the two most common categories of crime (property, persons) are now highest in urban areas. Data is presented for selected crime rates in major urban areas (table 8). Rates are considerably higher for all crimes in the Caracas Metropolitan Area. Among the other urban areas, ranking varies by type of crime, not by the number of inhabitants. Section III. CRIME VICTIMS 1. Crime Victim Survey Findings Victim surveys have been conducted in Venezuela since 1980, mostly with urban, rather than national, samples. The Census Office (Oficina Nacional de Estadística e Informática) conducted national victim surveys in 1981 and 1987; but the results from the former were of doubtful validity, while results from the latter were never prepared. In 2001 the Ministry of Interior and Justice contracted for a nationwide victim survey with a sample of 10,000 households, and the results are in preparation. A survey of victims of violence was carried out in the Caracas Metropolitan Area in 1996 as part of a Panamerican Health Organization international project on urban violence (Briceño- León et al., 1997). The survey used a random, multi-stage, cluster sample to select a final total of 1,297 respondents, who were asked about incidents of victimization during the previous 12 months (table 9). There are no national studies of the major correlates of victimization. A victim survey conducted in the city of Mérida (population approximately 250,000, located in the Andes) in July 2000 found that rates of robbery were significantly higher among persons ages 18 to 26, among those with secondary or university education, and those who were working or studying (table 10). Rates of personal theft were significantly higher for persons ages 43 to 50, married or widowed individuals, those who were working, and those with university or graduate education. 2. Victim Assistance. Number and Types of Agencies. Legal provisions for assistance relate specifically to the victim's participation in the criminal justice system. Article 117 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Venezuela, 2000b) describes victim's rights (for example, right to be informed, right to ask for state protection). Article 85 of the Organic Law Relating to Prosecutors (Venezuela, 1998d) provides for the establishment of victims' assistance offices in the prosecutor's office located in each jurisdiction. The primary objective of these offices is to provide protection to victims who need it, but they are also charged with providing information and support to victims as the case proceeds. No information is available on how the victims' assistance offices function in practice. Support for certain classes of crime victims is also provided by non-governmental organizations (NGOs). For example, victims of state-sponsored violence may obtain help from human rights organizations such as COFAVIC, which began as a movement to help families that suffered losses during the Caracazo in 1989 (COFAVIC, 2001), or PROVEA (2001), the Venezuelan Education-Action Program for Human Rights. Victims of sexual and domestic violence can get help from advocacy groups, such as AVESA (2001), the Venezuelan Association for an Alternative Sexual Education. There are no victim compensation boards in Venezuela. 3. Victim's Roles Victims can do three things in a criminal case: a. present an independent complaint to the criminal court. b. support the prosecutor's accusation. c. not present a complaint. Under a) and b) the victim becomes a secondary accuser, since the primary accuser is always the prosecutor. Under option c), participation can involve any of the following: * active intervention in case preparation (at the prosecutor's request) * requests for collection of evidence * right to be heard before a case is declared closed (without adjudication; * attendance at the preliminary hearing * right to challenge * acceptance of restitution (Vásquez, 1999). Victims cannot use the criminal justice system to recover money lost through check fraud or unpaid loans, but they can take action on these matters in the civil and mercantile courts. However, victims can initiate a civil suit for damages or indemnification in criminal court, once an offender has been sentenced (Article 415, Criminal Procedure Code). Victims, or their family members, can hire an attorney who joins the prosecutor in carrying forward the accusation. When the victim is an association, organization or company, its members or shareholders are authorized to hire an attorney to work with the prosecutor. 4. Victims' Rights Legislation The 1998 Criminal Procedure Code (Venezuela, 2000b) expressly includes victims' rights. These are -- a) to present a criminal complaint to the court b) to be informed of the outcome of the case c) to protection from possible attacks against self or family d) to accept the prosecutor's accusation, or present an independent accusation e) to initiate a civil suit for damages or indemnification f) to be notified by the prosecutor when a case is temporarily suspended g) to be heard in court concerning cases that are to be closed (without adjudication), or cases that are to be provisionally suspended h) to challenge case closure or a finding of not guilty. Section IV: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND RELATED MATTERS 1. Investigation, Search, Seizure, Detention A. Describe typical sequence of events and the legal standards Many criminal cases are initiated by reports of an alleged offense, made by victims or witnesses to the authorities. Such reports can be made to one or more police agencies, to the prosecutors' offices or to a criminal court. In the latter case, the victim presents a criminal complaint, including a description of the alleged crime and the identity of the accused (Vásquez, 1999). Most offenses are reported to the judicial police (PTJ). Other cases are initiated by the police in the course of routine activities, or by prosecutors. Whatever the mode by which it is initiated, further action on the case is determined by the prosecutor. The police must report any alleged offense to prosecutors within 8 hours, and are only authorized to take actions that are urgent and strictly necessary during that time. Prosecutors are assisted by the judicial police, who must comply with requests for interrogations and inspections, and (with authorization from a judge) interception of telephone calls, or house searches. Prosecutors can extend the preliminary investigation for as long as the statutory limit allows on each offense. Once the preliminary investigation has been completed, the prosecutor makes a decision either to file charges, or to request that the case be closed by the court or declared pending. The accused are to remain free during investigation and adjudication, except for the special cases noted below. B. If the sequence or standards differ. The principal variation in sequence occurs when offenders are "caught in the act" (delito flagrante), in which case they may, or should, be apprehended. "In the act" is defined (Article 257, Criminal Procedure Code) as committing the crime, having just committed the crime, being pursued by the police or public, or being found close to the crime scene with incriminating evidence (for example, weapons, stolen property). Since this provision greatly restricts police powers to arrest, compared to the previous Criminal Procedure Code which allowed arrest on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offense, there has been much debate about how exactly it is to be interpreted, including calls for greater flexibility. The partial reform of the Criminal Procedure Code in August 2000 (Venezuela, 2000b) changed the designation of the arrestee from "accused" (imputado) to "suspect" (sospechoso), thereby giving the police more freedom to arrest under this article. Citizens may, but are not obligated to, apprehend offenders caught in the act; authorities are required to do so. In either case, apprehension is only permitted if the offense carries a sentence of imprisonment. Offenders thus apprehended should be handed over to the prosecutor, and prosecutors must notify a trial judge of the arrest within 24 hours. If the judge concurs that the accused was indeed caught "in the act," he or she will order a trial within the next 10 to 15 days. If not, the judge will order the case to be processed in the usual manner (i.e., beginning with a preliminary hearing). C. Legal system exclude illegal evidence? The Criminal Procedure Code places limits on the collection of evidence, testimonies, and confessions. It is illegal to gather evidence by means of torture, mistreatment, coercion, threats, fraud, or unauthorized access to residences, correspondence, files, etc.,(Article 214). Any evidence collected illegally (for example, through torture, without authorization) can be challenged and excluded from the proceedings (Articles 444, 452). It is not known how frequently evidence is challenged, or how these provisions affect police compliance with legal standards. D. Legal system restrict certain investigative techniques? Prosecutors must obtain authorization from a judge before instructing the judicial police to conduct searches, collect documents, intercept phone calls, and so on. Authorizations are granted for 30 day, renewable, periods. In exceptional and urgent cases, prosecutors can order searches and evidence gathering without authorization from the court, but they must notify the judge and request confirmation of the procedure within 8 hours. There are no specific laws or regulations relating to frisking or body searches, only to the use of force during apprehension and investigation. E. Are there police crime laboratories? The judicial police have forensic labs in each state, reporting to the local police chief. It is not known how often they participate in criminal investigations. 2. Pretrial Release/Preventive Detention One objective of the July 1, 1999 Criminal Procedure Code is to reduce the formerly widespread use of preventive detention, making it the exception rather than the rule. Preventive detention must be requested by the prosecutor and ordered by the court. It can be used when the offense is punishable by imprisonment, when there are grounds for accusing the suspect, and when there is a reasonable presumption that the accused will flee or attempt to obstruct any part of the investigation (Article 259, Criminal Procedure Code). Risk of flight is determined by the accused's circumstances (employment, family, residence) and behavior during the current case (or a previous case), and by the magnitude of harm caused through the crime. Risk of obstruction is based on the likelihood that the accused will destroy, hide or forge evidence, or will attempt to influence co-defendants and witnesses. These risks are evaluated by the court without the benefit of a formula or point system. The partial reform of the Criminal Procedure Code (Venezuela, 2000b) also added a general clause allowing preventive detention when there are "grounds for presuming that the accused will not comply with procedural acts." If the accused is caught "in the act," the matter of preventive detention must be decided by a judge within 72 hours of the prosecutor's motion. Otherwise, preventive detention proceeds by judicial warrant. Decisions within 72 hours of the prosecutor's request are also required for all offenses punishable by more than 5 years imprisonment, and for citizens with a criminal record accused of crimes punishable by less than 5 years imprisonment. When preventive detention is ordered, prosecutors have 20 days to file charges, or make some other case decision. If no action has been taken, the accused can be released, or subjected to a cautionary measure. Cautionary measures are as follows: * house arrest * supervision by a designated person or institution * reporting to the court or other institution * prohibition on leaving the country, or the jurisdiction where the trial will be held * prohibition on attending certain meetings or frequenting certain places; * prohibition on communication with certain individuals (without impinging on the right to defense) * restraining order (domestic violence and rape) * bail. Bail can be set anywhere between 30 and 180 "tributary units." The tributary unit is a governmental measure, periodically adjusted for inflation. The 2001 value of each tributary unit is the equivalent of 16.17 USD (US dollars). Cautionary measures must always be used when the potential prison sentence does not exceed 5 years and the accused has no prior convictions. In addition, the court may use cautionary measures for other cases if it considers such measures sufficient to prevent flight or obstruction of justice. As of May 28, 2001, there were 7,274 accused in preventive detention, equivalent to 44% of the country's prison population (MIJ/DGCRR, 2001). This proportion is considerably lower than under the previous Criminal Procedure Code, when up to 75% of prisoners were in preventive detention (Human Rights Watch, 1997). For example, as of March 3, 1999, there were 14,153 accused in preventive detention (MIJ/DGCRR, 2001). Thus the new Criminal Procedure Code appears to have had an appreciable effect on the use of preventive detention. The latter, however, has still not attained the exceptional status that the Code's framers were hoping for. Information for the period September-December 2000 indicates that of 1,280 new cases then being processed by the courts, 483 (38%) involved preventive detention (TSJ/OPDI, 2001). In contrast to preventive detention, cautionary measures are little used. In May 2001, only 71 accused were under such measures (MIJ/DGCRR, 2001). 3. Legal Rights of Suspects/Accused Article 122 of the Criminal Procedure Code lists the following legal rights for the accused: a. to be informed specifically and clearly of the charges b. to call family members, an attorney or a legal aid association to advise of arrest c. to assistance, during the preliminary investigation, by a defense attorney or public defender d. to an interpreter, should one be necessary, without charge e. to request that the prosecutor investigate facts or circumstances that might establish innocence f. to declare directly to a judge g. to request that the investigation proceed, and to be informed of its content, except where parts have been temporarily declared confidential h. to request a speedy revocation of preventive detention i. to adhere to the constitutional precept of silence, or to declare while not under oath j. not to be tortured, or treated in a cruel, inhuman, or degrading k. not to be subjected to investigative or detention techniques that alter freewill or volition, even when freely consented to l. not to be tried in absence, except in cases permitted by the Constitution. 4. Investigation and Case Preparation Investigation and case preparation is the responsibility of the public prosecutor. The objective of this phase of the inquiry is to determine whether or not a crime has occurred and whether there is evidence to incriminate the accused. Prosecutors use the judicial police as the primary auxiliary investigative unit, but may also order other police forces to gather or supply information and evidence. Police therefore have little autonomy to act in investigation and case preparation. If they hear of a crime, they must inform the prosecutor within 8 hours; and if they arrest an offender caught "in the act," he or she must be placed immediately under the supervision of the prosecutor. Prosecutors may also request information from public or private organizations or from citizens. Persons obstructing the preliminary investigation may be arrested for up to 6 hours. Judges take little part in the investigation, except to authorize certain types of evidence gathering; to confirm or deny that the accused was caught "in the act," and order preventive detention or a cautionary measure. 5. Pretrial Diversion There are two types of pretrial diversion: restitution and pre-prosecution diversion. 5.1 Restitution The Criminal Procedure Code allows for restitution primarily as a means to decongest the judicial system, and only secondarily as a means to promote restorative justice (Vásquez, 1999). Restitution is applicable in the following cases: a. crimes that affect property b. crimes of negligence that have not caused death or permanent serious physical harm c. the victim and accused have agreed to restitution. The accused must offer monetary compensation, agree to perform work or some other activity, or simply apologize for the offense. The important thing is that the victim agrees to the proposal. The judge decides on the acceptability of the restitution agreement. If this is the first time the accused has performed restitution, the case is closed following successful completion of the agreement. If the accused has already made restitution in a prior case involving the same type of crime, successful completion of the second restitution agreement leads not to case closure, but to a two-thirds reduction in the sentence (Article 34). 5.2 Pre-prosecution Diversion Pre-prosecution diversion is available to the accused in cases for which probation is an applicable post-sentencing option. The judge sets a time limit for diversion (minimum 2 years, maximum 5 years), and can impose one or several of the following conditions: a. residence in a certain place b. prohibition on visiting certain places or people c. prohibition on drug use and excessive alcohol consumption d. participation in substance abuse programs e. begin, or complete, basic education; or complete an occupational training course f. perform work or services for the state or for public welfare institutions; g. undergo medical or psychological treatment h. remain at work, or obtain work i. report to an individual/authority designated by the judge j. prohibition on carrying weapons k. prohibition on driving, when a vehicle was used to commit the crime. Successful compliance with these conditions leads to case dismissal. Noncompliance leads to a resumption of the case, or the extension of diversion by an extra year. 6. Case Dismissals A. Reasons for case attrition. Case attrition can occur in the following ways: 1. Dismissal. There are a number of ways in which dismissal can occur: 1.1 Dismissal due to the opportunity principal (Article 31, Criminal Procedure Code). In the following circumstances, the prosecutor can ask the judge to dismiss the case: * trivial, or highly infrequent crime, that does not seriously harm the public interest. This consideration can be applied to all of the accused in a case. However, it does not apply to crimes with a maximum prison sentence greater than 4 years, or to public functionaries who commit the crime in the course of their duties. * when the accused had very minor participation in the crime, except where the accused is a public functionary who committed the crime in the course of his/her duties; * crimes of negligence, in which the accused has suffered grave physical or moral injury, such that punishment would be disproportionate to the facts of the case; * when conditions would be met for granting probation; * when the punishment would be extremely light, compared to punishments already handed out, or about to be handed out, in other cases against the accused; * when the case involves organized crime and the accused collaborates with the investigation (Article 33, Criminal Procedure Code). 1.2 Dismissal (Articles 325-327, Criminal Procedure Code). The prosecutor can request the court to dismiss the case in these circumstances: * The alleged crime did not occur, or cannot be linked to the accused. * The alleged act is not a crime, or there is sufficient justification for the accused's actions. * The accused has already been tried for this crime and there is a firm sentence. * There is little likelihood that new evidence will be forthcoming, and there is insufficient basis for indicting the suspect. The judge may call prosecutor and victim to a hearing to decide on dismissal. Both sides may appeal the decision. 1.3 Complaint Dismissed (Article 310, Criminal Procedure Code) The prosecutor may request the court to dismiss a victim's complaint, for the same reasons cited in 1.2. 1.4 Dismissal at Preliminary Hearing (Article 333, Criminal Procedure Code). The judge may dismiss the case at the preliminary hearing. 2. Pending Further Action (Articles 322-324, Criminal Procedure Code) When there is insufficient evidence to bring formal charges, the prosecutor may place the case "on file" (i.e., pending further action). The prosecutor must inform the victim, and any cautionary measure taken against the accused must be lifted. Victims have the right to request the court to instruct the prosecutor to continue with the investigation. 3. Restitution Agreements See Section 5.1 above. 4. Pre-Prosecution Diversion See Section 5.2 above 5. Reconciliation (Violence Against Women and the Family) Article 34 of the Law on Violence Against Women and the Family (Venezuela, 1998a) provides for reconciliation between victim and aggressor, if the official that receives the complaint thinks that reconciliation might be possible. A meeting with both parties must be scheduled within 36 hours of receiving the complaint. If reconciliation is not achieved, the case continues. B. Organization of case attrition. Prosecutors initiate two of the procedures that lead to case attrition (dismissals, except at the preliminary hearing; pending further action) and may help initiate the other three (restitution, pre-prosecution diversion, reconciliation). The accused and their attorneys must request pre- prosecution diversion, and are presumably active in setting up restitution agreements. Prosecutors may attempt reconciliation in cases of family/intimate violence, but so may other agencies that receive these complaints, such as the police. Judges authorize four of the procedures (opportunity principal, restitution, pre-prosecution diversion, dismissal) and may be called on to evaluate a decision to put the case on file (pending further action) if the victim appeals the prosecutor's action. In addition, judges may directly dismiss a case at the preliminary hearing. Judges have no authority over reconciliation (family/intimate violence) unless the court was the agency that received the complaint. C. Rate of case attrition. According to data provided by the public prosecutor's office (FGR/DDC, 2001), during 2000 143,206 cases were opened. Of those, only 26,824 (19%) had resulted in a decision, while the rest were still in process. The decisions were as follows (table 11). The primary cause of case attrition was dismissal, which in its different modalities accounted for almost 42% of all decisions. Cases declared as "pending further action" represented almost a third of the total. Pre-prosecution diversion and reconciliation were used infrequently. In all, just under 25% of cases resulted in charges or guilty pleas. 7. Convictions Without Trials A. Statistics. Charges were filed in 4,679 cases and guilty pleas were entered in 1,458 cases. Summing these gives a total of 6,137 cases in which formal charges were filed at a preliminary hearing. Guilty pleas represented 24% of the cases charged. Given that some of the other cases where charges were filed (4,679) would result in acquittals (although the number is unknown) the proportion of convictions obtained without trials was probably somewhat greater than 24%. B. "Plea negotiations" or equivalent. One of the many innovations in the 1999 Criminal Procedure Code is the possibility for the accused to get a sentence reduction by entering a guilty plea (Article 376). This provision is based explicitly on parallels in other criminal justice systems, such as plea bargaining in the United States and the Spanish conformidad (agreement) (see Introductory Remarks to the Criminal Procedure Code, Venezuela, 1998b). However, the Venezuelan version does not allow for bargaining between the key parties involved in the case. If the accused pleads guilty at the preliminary hearing, he or she may request immediate sentencing, in which case the judge must reduce the sentence by between one-third and one-half, depending on the facts of the case. When the offense involves violence, the maximum reduction is one-third of the sentence. This is the only circumstance in which the "control," or preliminary, judge may impose a sentence. 7.1 A Note on the Judicial Division of Labor in Criminal Procedure Judicial involvement in pretrial procedure has been generically referred to as "the court," or "the judge." However, it is important to explain briefly that judicial participation in the criminal justice system is functionally and administratively divided into three components (Article 517, Criminal Procedure Code). "Control" judges oversee case processing up to the preliminary hearing in which the suspect is formally charged. They are perhaps best termed "preliminary judges." Trial judges oversee trials, with or without the presence of a jury, and set sentences for the accused who are found guilty. "Execution" judges oversee the imposition of the sentence, including alternative measures, such as probation. They are best considered "supervisory judges." 8. Trials A. Describe the nature of the trial procedure. The trial begins with opening statements from the prosecutor, the complainant (if there is one, see Section III.3) and the defense attorney. The accused is then given the opportunity to speak, or has the right to remain silent. The prosecutor, the complainant, the defense attorney and the court (in that order) may question the accused. Following this, the trial proceeds with expert testimony, during which cross examination may also occur. Finally, witnesses are presented, beginning with those called by the prosecution, followed by witnesses for the complainant and finally witnesses for the defense. Documentary evidence may be introduced and read, in whole or in part, during the trial. However, testimony from experts and witnesses must be oral, and they are not allowed to read written statements. Following the presentation of evidence and testimony, the prosecutor, complainant and defense attorney (in that order) are given the opportunity to sum up their case. The prosecutor and defense attorney are also allowed a brief rebuttal of their opposite´s concluding remarks. The victim may also make a statement, if present, even though not participating in the trial as a complainant. Finally, the trial judge asks the accused if he or she has anything more to say, and following this declares the debate closed. The judge, judges, or jury (see below) retire to decide on the accused´s guilt or innocence, and the trial judge sets the sentence in cases with a finding of guilt. Cases involving misdemeanors, crimes for which imprisonment is prohibited, and crimes for which prison sentences cannot exceed 4 years, are heard by a trial judge. Cases for which the prison sentence is greater than 4 years and no more than 16 years are heard by a trial judge and two lay judges. The lay judges may intervene to question experts, witnesses, and the accused. Their role is to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused, together with the trial judge (disagreements are resolved by vote). The trial judge sets the sentence. Cases for which the prison sentence is greater than 16 years are heard by a trial judge and a nine member jury. The jury must decide on the guilt or innocence of the accused (disagreements are resolved by vote), and the trial judge sets the sentence. Lay judges and jury members are selected from voter rolls, and must be Venezuelan citizens, over age 25, with at least a high school diploma, residents of the jurisdiction where the case is being heard, without a criminal record, and of sound body and mind. Executive and elected officials, lawyers and members of the armed forces cannot serve as lay judges or jury members. B. Outcomes at trial. Following the enactment of the 1999 Criminal Procedure Code and subsequent reorganization of the courts, almost no information was compiled on trial outcomes. The Supreme Court reported on 140 trials that were held in five states (Anzoátegui, Bolívar, Falcón, Yaracuy and Zulia) between September and December 2000. Of these, 72 (51%) resulted in a conviction; 47 (34%) resulted in acquittal; and 21 cases (15%) were dismissed (TSJ/OPDI, 2001). 9. Sentencing and Penology A. Discretion and sentencing. Both the Penal Code and additional criminal laws set a minimum and maximum sentence for each offense. Article 37 of the Penal Code indicates that judges must apply the mid-point sentence (for example, if the minimum sentence is 2 years, and the maximum is 4 years, the applicable sentence is 3 years), except under the following circumstances: 1. There are mitigating circumstances (for example, an offender between ages 18 and 21), or aggravating circumstances (for example, premeditation, disguise). In these cases, the trial judge must reduce or increase the sentence, respectively, or consider their relative merits and demerits when both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present. 2. When the law specifies that the minimum, or (in other cases) the maximum sentence is to be applied, or that these limits must be reduced or increased by one-fourth. Trial judges thus have little discretion to set sentences. The only opportunities in which discretion may be exercised concern the evaluation of mitigating and aggravating circumstances, and the minority of offenses for which more than one type of possible sentence is specified. An example of the latter is the misdemeanor of "failure to comply," for which the sentence is arrest for 5 to 30 days, or a fine of between 20 and 150 bolívares. However, the low real value of the fine (between 3 and 21 US cents) makes it an unlikely sentencing option. B. Sentencing When the accused admits guilt at the preliminary hearing, the preliminary judge must set sentence, applying the rules on sentence reduction (see Section IV.7, above). All other sentences are imposed by the trial judge, immediately following a finding of guilt. Given the rigid and mechanical nature of sentencing (see immediately above), there are no presentence reports or hearings. C. Probation. Does probation exist? Probation was first introduced in Venezuela in 1980 (Venezuela, 1979; 1993b). It may be assigned as an alternative to prison under the following circumstances: 1. The person is a first time offender. 2. The prison sentence is no greater than 8 years. 3. The offender agrees to abide by conditions set by the court and the probation office. 4. The offense is not aggravated theft, aggravated robbery, kidnaping, corruption (when the maximum sentence is greater than 2 years imprisonment), or the more serious drug offenses (for example production, trafficking, money laundering) specified in the Drug Law (Venezuela, 1993a). Conditions include -- * restrictions on movement * obligation to undergo treatment or to study * community service * and restitution. The maximum supervision period is 5 years from the date on which probation is granted. Probation is not a sentencing alternative for trial judges, because it is not listed as an option in the Penal Code or other criminal laws. Once convicted, sentenced offenders may petition the supervisory judge for probation, and the latter must order a psychosocial evaluation by probation officers. These evaluations appear to serve less as a selection procedure and more as a framework for recommending particular conditions to be imposed on the offender. Thus, offenders who comply with requirements 1, 2, and 4 listed above are in principle eligible for probation, provided they accept the conditions recommended by probation officers and adopted by the court. The law sets a maximum of 30 working days for the application procedure and decision. Convicted offenders who were in preventive detention must remain in prison while the decision is made. All other convicted offenders may remain on conditional release until a decision has been reached. Because probation is a post-sentencing option, there are, logically, no figures on the number of sentences to probation. As of May 2001, the prison and probation service (MIJ/DGCRR, 2001) reported 3,502 offenders on probation. This represented 18% of all offenders serving sentences. There are no national figures available on probation revocation. However, a study of all probation terms granted in five western states between 1980 and 2000 found that 9% of cases were subject to a revocation request by the probation agency (information on the supervisory judges´ decisions regarding revocation was unavailable) (Birkbeck and Pérez, 2001b). Most revocation requests (71%) resulted from failure to report or failure to comply with conditions. The rest (29%) were the result of probationers having committed a new offense. D. Penalties. Types of penalties. To understand the types of penalties currently in place in Venezuela, it is best to adopt a historical perspective. Articles 9 and 10 of the 1926 Penal Code distinguish and define corporal and non-corporal penalties. Corporal Penalties -- * incarceration (penitentiary) * incarceration (prison) * arrest (police jail) * penal colony * confinement * deportation. Non-Corporal Penalties -- * supervision by public authorities * civil interdiction * political interdiction * prohibition from engaging in certain trades or professions * termination from work * suspension from work * fines * cautions * loss of instruments or weapons with which the crime was committed * payment of legal costs. The corporal penalties have non-corporal penalties attached. For example, incarceration also carries the non-corporal penalty of political interdiction (among other things, convicted prisoners cannot vote); confinement carries suspension from work. In the main body of the Penal Code penalties are usually corporal, but occasionally fines (although fines usually appear as secondary penalties). By far the largest number of corporal penalties are incarceration in prison, followed by incarceration in a penitentiary. Article 12 of the Penal Code defines a penitentiary as a prison facility that imposes forced labor and, for at least part of the sentence, solitary confinement. Thus, penitentiaries are meant to provide the most severe penalties for convicted offenders. The various Penitentiary Laws that have been enacted since 1926 and which are designed to regulate prisons (for example, Venezuela, 1961; Venezuela, 2000c) have incorporated the distinction between penitentiaries and prisons, although in practice there is now no difference between penal facilities (see Section X). Since 1961, the Penitentiary Law has also provided for progressive reintegration through three different benefits that prisoners can apply for: * work release (for prisoners who have completed one-fourth of their sentence) * open prison (for prisoners who have completed a third of their sentence) * conditional release (for prisoners who have completed two-thirds of their sentence). These benefits are authorized by supervisory judges. Starting in 1980, convicted offenders were able to apply to the supervisory judge for probation. Criminal laws enacted since the Penal Code have largely incorporated incarceration as the primary penalty. However, fines have also been designated as a primary or secondary penalty. In order to avoid the effects of inflation, two strategies have been employed in setting fines. The first has been to express fines in terms of a monetary unit whose value is periodically adjusted to account for inflation. For example, the Environmental Crimes Law (Venezuela, 1992) sets fines in terms of days of minimum wage. The Law on Violence Against Women and the Family (Venezuela, 1998a) specifies the fine in terms of Tributary Units. Second, fines may be specified as a proportion of illegal gains, as in the Anti- Corruption Law (Venezuela, 1982) which typically includes a fine equivalent to up to 50% of those gains. As already pointed out, the fines still in place in the Penal Code have been reduced to absurdly small sums by inflation. Recent criminal laws have also incorporated a variety of other sanctions, most of them supplementary. For example, the Environmental Crimes Law lists community work as a possible primary sanction for individuals; and, among others, professional suspension, prohibition from contracting with government, and publication of the sentence in the national press (at the offender's expense) as supplementary sanctions. Companies are subject to fines, closure, and other measures. Similarly, Article 66 of the Drug Law (Venezuela, 1993a) provides for confiscation of property related to, or deriving from, drug crimes. In sum, imprisonment is the standard and basic penalty in Venezuelan criminal law. Almost half of the convicted offenders under state supervision, as of May 2001, were in prison (table 12). The maximum prison sentence for any crime is 30 years (Article 94, Penal Code), although there have recently been calls to implement life imprisonment for serious crimes (Martínez, 2001). Information on the application of fines and other penalties is not available. E. Death penalty. The death penalty was abolished by President Juan Crisóstomo Falcón in 1863, and its abolition was ratified by the Federal Constitution of 1864 (Arraiz Luca, 2000). Isolated calls for the reinstatement of the death penalty were made during the national Constituent Assembly (in 1999) to draft the new constitution, but these did not lead to serious debate (Guerrero, 1999). 10. Appeals A. What proportion of cases are appealed? Information for the period September-December 2000 indicates that of 1,280 cases then being processed by the courts, 141 (11%) were on appeal (TSJ/OPDI, 2001). B. What are the grounds for appeal? Article 444 of the Criminal Procedure Code lists the following grounds for appeal: * when principles relating to the trial procedure have not been complied with * when reasons for the sentence are absent, contradictory or illogical * when the sentence is based on evidence that has been obtained illegally * when evidence has been introduced in contravention of oral procedures * failures to comply with procedure that limit the right to defense * violations based on failure to apply, or erroneous interpretation of, relevant legal norms. Specifically, trials must be based on oral testimony. The judge that decides guilt or innocence must have been present throughout the proceedings, the trial must be completed within 1 day, or held on successive days, and the trial must be public. Parties have 10 days to present an appeal; the appeals court has 10 days to consider the appeal, and must set a hearing within the following 5 to 10 days. If the court upholds the appeal, the case is sent back for retrial in the originating jurisdiction before a different judge. Article 443 of the Criminal Procedure Code precludes appeals of sentences resulting from jury trials. C. Can the state appeal? Article 426 of the Criminal Procedure Code grants the right of appeal to all legitimately recognized parties in a case, including the prosecutor. Article 429 indicates that appellants may only appeal decisions that are unfavorable to them. 11. Parole A. Is there a parole system? Articles 13 and 15 of the Penal Code provide for supervision by public authorities (Municipal Prefects) of offenders who are released from penitentiaries and prisons after completing their sentences. Supervision should last for the equivalent of a quarter of sentences served in penitentiaries and a fifth of the time served in prison. These provisions are not applied, and there is no parole system in Venezuela, only the early release mechanisms described in Section IV.9.D. Section V. POLICE 1. Administrative organization Police forces are organized at the National, State, and Municipal level. 1.1 National Police Forces 1.1.1 Judicial Police (Cuerpo Técnico de Policía Judicial, or PTJ) The PTJ was founded almost immediately after the overthrow of dictator Marcos Pérez Jiménez in 1958 (Venezuela, 1958). The PTJ is the primary judicial police force in the country, charged with the reception of crime reports made by citizens, the investigation of crimes, gathering of evidence and arrest of suspects. In all these tasks, the PTJ is subordinated to the public prosecutor's office. Administratively, the PTJ is attached to the Ministry of the Interior and Justice. The national headquarters are in Caracas, and there is one office in each state capital, with additional offices in some other cities. The PTJ's name was recently changed to the National Directorate of Criminal Investigation. 1.1.2 The Directorate of Intelligence and Prevention Services (DISIP) The DISIP is primarily a national security force, dealing with crimes against the state, kidnaping, etc. It was created in 1969 as a replacement for the Dirección General de Policía (DIGEPOL). The national headquarters are in Caracas, and there are local offices in each state. The DISIP is administratively and operationally attached to the Ministry of the Interior and Justice. 1.1.3 The National Guard The National Guard was founded in 1937 and entrusted with police work through the National Security Service Law of 1938. The National Guard is part of Venezuela´s armed forces and is attached to the Ministry of Defense. Apart from its military duties, the National Guard is responsible for policing frontiers, checkpoints, ports, and contraband; for providing perimeter security at prisons; for policing environmental crimes; and for providing auxiliary service as judicial police, or in the restoration of public order (Agudo Freites, 1973). The policing responsibilities are overseen by the Ministry of the Interior and Justice. The national headquarters are in Caracas, with local headquarters in each state and numerous other offices and checkpoints relating to specific duties. 1.1.4 Traffic Police The traffic police (Cuerpo Técnico de Vigilancia del Tránsito y Transporte Terrestre), administratively attached to the Ministry of Infrastructure, are responsible for surveillance, preliminary investigation and occasionally arresting suspects, in traffic offenses that involve violations of the criminal law. 1.2 State Police Twenty-two of the 23 states and the Caracas Metropolitan Area have a uniformed police force. (Only Vargas State, just north of Caracas, has no state police force. It is served by a municipal police force.) The state police are responsible for patrol work and public order, arrests (when offenders are caught in the act), and community service. They may also serve as auxiliary judicial police. State police commanders have, with few exceptions, been picked from the National Guard, which reinforces some of the quasi-military characteristics of these forces (drilling, obedience, etc.). However, the uniformed police are a branch of state government, and the Governor is the commander in chief (in Caracas, the Metropolitan Police are under the Capital District Mayor's office). Each force is regulated by a local Police Code. To further complicate the institutional environment, state police forces are also coordinated by an office in the Ministry of the Interior and Justice that compiles selected statistics and sets guidelines for internal procedures. 1.3 Municipal Police Beginning in 1990, wealthier municipalities in the country's largest cities set up municipal police forces. In the Capital District, municipal forces were created in Sucre (1990), Baruta (1992), Chacao (1993), Libertador (1995), and El Hatillo (1995) (Gabaldón, 2001). By July 2001, there were 77 municipal forces in the country, concentrated particularly in municipalities belonging to Anzoateguí, Carabobo, and Miranda states (MIJ/DGCP, 2001). They are attached to the mayors' offices and regulated by the state's Police Code and by municipal ordinance. With so many different uniformed police forces, there are obviously difficulties in coordination and efficiency. For that reason, since at least 1977 there have been diverse proposals to create a unified national police force (Gabaldón, 1999). The most recent is the National Police Law, which is currently being debated in the National Assembly (Casas, 2000; Asamblea Nacional, 2001). This law would join all uniformed police forces (state, Capital District, municipal), together with the traffic police, into one national force. 2. Annual Budget There are no cumulative figures on the annual budget for police. The national annual budget for 2000 gives the figures for national police forces (table 13). Not included are the state and municipal budgets for uniformed police. The expenditures shown in table 13 were equivalent to $14.73 USD per capita. 3. Number of Personnel Judicial Police: no current (2001) information is available. The most recently published estimate indicates that there are approximately 6,000 members of the PTJ (Morais de Guerrero, 1998). DISIP: no information available. National Guard: no information available. Traffic Police: In 2001 there were approximately 4,000 traffic police. State Police: no comprehensive information is available for the 22 state police forces and the Caracas Metropolitan Police. They are estimated to have approximately 40,000 personnel, of which 20% may be female (MIJ/DGCP, 2001). The Caracas Metropolitan Police has 11,000 employees, of which 9,500 are involved in police work (700, or 7%, are women). The remaining 1,500 employees have administrative and service responsibilities. Of the 9,500 police officers, about 8,000 are uniformed and the rest civilian (including 400 officers who work in "Intelligence"). There are 650 supervisory officers, 40 (6%) of whom are women (Gabaldón, 2001). Municipal Police: no comprehensive information is available. 4. Qualifications and Entry Requirements and Removal Judicial Police (PTJ) -- * ages 17 to 22 * Venezuelan citizenship * high school graduate * no criminal record * minimum height 1.65 m. (men), 1.6 m. (women) * drivers license * various others (for example, no tattoos). DISIP: no information available. National Guard -- * ages 16 to 21 * Venezuelan citizenship * single, and no children * high school graduate (or in final year of high school) * no criminal record * minimum height 1.68 m. (men), 1.56 m. (women) * various others (for example, minimum high school GPA 12/20; no tattoos). Traffic Police -- * ages 17 to 22 * Venezuelan citizenship * single * high school graduate * minimum height, 1.65 m. * military registration (candidates 18 and older). Uniformed Police (State and Municipal) -- * age 18 or older * Venezuelan citizenship * high school graduate * no criminal record. 5. Initial and In-Service Training PTJ: New recruits undertake a 3 year training course at the PTJ's Police University Institute in Caracas, from which they graduate with a technical qualification in Police Science or Forensics. The last 3 months of training are spent on placements. Successful candidates then begin work as detectives. Detectives are required to take an additional 2 years of schooling while at work, in order to complete a degree in Police Science. No further in-service training is required for promotion through the ranks of Inspector and Commissioner, although graduate qualifications are necessary for promotion to the most senior ranks. DISIP: no information available National Guard: Until 1999, national guardsmen received 18 months training in one of three training centers, located in the eastern state of Monagas, in Caracas, and the western state of Táchira. Starting in 2000, training was extended to 3 years, leading to a technical degree in one of the special areas of competence: environmental protection, security, drugs, etc. Traffic Police: The traffic police receive approximately 1 year of initial training. The Traffic Police School, in the state of Aragua, has been closed for about 4 years. The Aragua State Police have recently assumed training of traffic police until the school is reopened. Uniformed Police (State and Municipal) State Police: Some police are directly recruited and trained by each state police force (training usually lasts 6 months). Others attend one of the six police training schools (located in different regions of the country), where training lasts for either 6 or 12 months. Two of these training schools (located in the cities of Maracaibo and Maracay) also provide 18 month training programs for officers. There is also a 4-year university program for officers at the Metropolitan Police University Institute in Caracas. Short (usually 1 month) training courses are also required for promotion. Municipal police: Initial training courses (averaging 4 to 5 months) are organized by each police force. 6. Starting Salary PTJ: approximately 300,000 bolívares ($418 USD) per month, equivalent to 2.1 minimum wages. DISIP: no information is available. National Guard: approximately 210,000 bolívares ($293 USD) per month, equivalent to 1.5 minimum wages. Traffic Police: approximately 340,000 bolívares ($474 USD) per month, equivalent to 2.4 minimum wages. State Police: salaries vary from force to force. The average starting salary is 300,000 to 400,000 bolívares ($418-558 USD) equivalent to between 2.1 and 2.8 minimum wages. Municipal Police: salaries vary from force to force. The average starting salary is 300,000 to 550,000 bolívares ($418-767 USD) per month, equivalent to between 2.1 and 3.8 minimum wages. 7. Accountability Complaints against the police may be lodged with a wide variety of institutions and individuals (for example, with neighborhood associations, Prefects, Ombudsmen, the media, or human rights groups). However, complaints are only subject to formal processing when they are presented, or redirected, to either of the following: the police (leading to internal review of police behavior), or prosecutors (representing external review). These review procedures are separate, although each may set off inquiry in the other domain. For the National Guard, the procedures are slightly more varied. Complaints against the uniformed state and municipal police may be presented to the Police Inspector´s office (or its equivalent), an internal agency that investigates complaints or police misconduct and recommends disciplinary measures when considered necessary. Most police forces use the Disciplinary Rules drafted by the Ministry of the Interior in 1981 (Ministerio de Relaciones Interiores, 1981). These rules define disciplinary actions, ranging from verbal and written warnings through "simple" and "strict" arrest to termination of employment, and specify the authority of each rank to impose such measures. The Disciplinary Rules also define and enumerate three levels of infraction (minor, serious, and very serious) that mainly reflect a concern with institutional discipline and order rather than acceptable interaction with citizens. Complaints against all police may also be presented to the prosecutor's office in each jurisdiction. In these cases, the prosecutor examines the alleged actions of the police in terms of Article 65 of the Penal Code, which exonerates public employees from criminal responsibility, provided they act within the legal limits established for their agency, or they act in self defense. If the prosecutor finds sufficient grounds for establishing criminal responsibility, the case is processed under criminal law in the same manner as others handled by prosecutors. Complaints against national guardsmen may be presented to their immediate superiors, leading to an administrative inquiry and possible disciplinary measures under the Military's Disciplinary Rules (Venezuelan, 1949). Alternatively, complaints may be presented to prosecutors. In either case, if the infraction constitutes a crime, Article 261 of the Constitution provides separate jurisdictions for adjudication and sentencing, depending on the circumstances. Military crimes (for example, treason, espionage, rebellion, mutiny) should be processed through the military justice system (Venezuela, 1938; 1998g); common crimes and human rights violations should be processed through the criminal justice system. In practice, many common crimes allegedly committed by national guardsmen are still processed through the military justice system. 8. Legal Authority Each police force is founded on legislation that defines its mission, structure and responsibilities: * Judicial Police: Executive Decree No. 48 (Venezuela, 1958), and the Investigative Police Law (Venezuela, 1998h) * DISIP: Presidential Decree No. 15 (Venezuela, 1969) * National Guard: Executive Decree, August 4, 1937; Organic Law of the Armed Forces (Venezuela, 1983). * Traffic Police: Traffic Law, and Regulations (Venezuela, 1996; 1998f) * Uniformed Police (state and municipal): the Police Code in each State and in the Capital District. The principal legal base for police activity is the Criminal Procedure Code (Venezuela, 2000b). Criminal laws enacted since the Penal Code may also contain provisions that require or authorize police activity. The uniformed state and municipal police are also authorized to act under the local Police Code, which lists minor infractions (for example, public nuisances, illegal trash disposal) and their corresponding sanctions, many of which can be applied by the police. 9. Relation to the Military The National Guard are a military force with police functions. In addition, most state police forces are commanded by National Guard officers. State police forces have a quasi-military character, with daily drilling, a relatively authoritarian command chain and rigid rules. The other police forces have a much more civilian character, although the preferred operational mode of the DISIP is that of a special response team. 10. Unions There are no police unions in Venezuela. 11. Technological Infrastructure A. Identification systems. Venezuela has a national identification system which requires all citizens aged nine or over to carry an identity card (cédula de identidad). The national identification system is attached to the Ministry of the Interior and Justice. Among other things, the identification system collects fingerprints which are stored both locally and in headquarters (Caracas). Recording and retrieval are manual procedures. The Ministry of the Interior and Justice also maintains a national criminal history archive, which records sentences handed out in criminal courts around the country. Most police agencies fingerprint arrestees and, once again, record and retrieve fingerprints manually. There appears to be little coordination between agencies in recording and accessing fingerprints, and the latter seem to play only a minor role in police work. B. Vehicles. Automobiles (most of them relatively new), motorcycles, and other vehicles are used by the police. In congested urban areas, the police also use bicycles. C. Weapons. Weapons vary by agency: * Judicial Police: revolvers, pistols * DISIP: revolvers, pistols, shotguns, semi- automatic weapons * National Guard: revolvers, pistols, shotguns, semi-automatic weapons, batons, tear gas * Traffic Police: revolvers * Uniformed state and municipal police: revolvers, rifles, batons, tear gas, dogs. D. Surveillance. No information is available. E. Radios. No information is available. F. Computers. Computers are now quite widely used in police forces, mainly to support administrative tasks, but also to aid in the compilation of statistics. 12. Special Policies There are no special policies or programs currently being implemented by the major police agencies. Section VI: PROSECUTORS 1. Administrative Organization A. Structure. Prosecutors are organized as a national agency (Ministerio Público, or Fiscalía) with its national headquarters in Caracas (Venezuela, 1998d). The head of the agency is called the Prosecutor General. The Prosecutor General's office is responsible for representing the prosecution before other national agencies (for example, the Supreme Court, the Tax Office), and for coordinating prosecutorial activity around the country. There is a prosecutor's office in each of the 24 jurisdictions (23 states, plus the Capital District), headed by a Senior Prosecutor and staffed by prosecutors who work in the preliminary, trial and supervisory courts. B. Private Prosecutors. No private prosecutors are permitted in Venezuela. However, victims may hire a lawyer to present a complaint against the accused, in which case the lawyer would work in concert with the prosecutor. 2. Annual Budget Total expenditure for the prosecutor´s office in 2000 was 112,610 million bolívares ($165.6 million USD), equivalent to $6.85 USD per capita (OCEPRE, 2001). 3. Number of Personnel As of May 15, 2001, there were a total of 498 prosecutors in Venezuela: 55 covering national cases, 24 senior prosecutors, 116 prosecutors in Caracas and 303 in the states. This gives a rate of 2.1 prosecutors per 100,000 inhabitants. Each prosecutor has one or two assistant prosecutors (Ministerio Público, 2001). 4. Qualifications and Entry requirements The Prosecutor General is elected by the National Assembly within the first 30 days of each new presidential period (every 6 years). No particular qualifications are specified by law, but it is understood that the Prosecutor General must be Venezuelan, a lawyer, and with substantial qualifications and experience. The qualifications needed to become a Senior Prosecutor are: Venezuelan citizenship; at least 30 years old; no civil or political interdiction; lawyer with a graduate qualification in criminal law, or working as a university professor, or with 5 years experience as a prosecutor, or 10 years in practice; obtain at least 75% of the maximum grade in the selection exam. The Senior Prosecutor is name by the Prosecutor General. The qualifications needed to become a prosecutor are: Venezuelan citizenship, lawyer, no civil or political interdiction. 5. Initial and In-Service Training Prosecutors receive 1 to 2 weeks of initial training; followed by periodic weekend courses on specific topics. 6. Starting Salary Assistant prosecutors start at 940,000 bolívares ($1,312 USD) per month, the equivalent of 6.5 minimum wages. Prosecutors start at 1,200,000 bolívares ($1,674 USD) per month, the equivalent of 8.3 minimum wages. 7. Accountability Complaints regarding alleged misconduct by prosecutors must be made to the Prosecutor General, when a prosecutor or senior prosecutor is involved, and to the prosecutor or senior prosecutor, if one of their employees are involved. The Organic Law on the Public Prosecutor (Ley Orgánica del Ministerio Público, Venezuela, 1998d), lists the following types of misconduct: * offense, insults, etc., to superiors or subordinates; excessive use of authority over subordinates * noncompliance or negligence in relation to official duties * behavior that represents, in the opinion of the Prosecutor General, a lack of discipline * contempt of court. The following measures may be taken in response: verbal or written warning; fines; suspension for up to 3 months; termination. The prosecutor processing the complaint may also open a criminal case if it is believed that criminal behavior has occurred. Criminal behavior, in this case, includes negligence, tardiness and failure to act (Articles 204-209, Penal Code). There is no recent information available on the number of complaints made against prosecutors or their outcomes. 8. Discretion Under Article 309 of the Criminal Procedure Code, prosecutors are obliged to receive and process all complaints that allege criminal behavior and all reports of crimes. They must then decide how to process the case: dismissal or file pending further action, restitution, pre-prosecution diversion, reconciliation, formal charges. In almost all cases, preliminary judges decide on the appropriateness of the action, leaving prosecutors little formally recognized discretion in case handling. De facto priority is given to cases where the accused is under arrest or preventive detention. 9. Technology Although computers are now quite widely used in prosecutor's offices, the case filing system is still primarily manual. Section VII: DEFENSE BAR 1. Administrative Organization Article 134 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows defendants to represent themselves, provided that, in the opinion of the judge, the defense is likely to be adequate. Defendants may instead name (and pay for) up to three attorneys who will conduct the defense. If the defendant cannot afford an attorney, the court assigns a public defender. If there is no public defender in the jurisdiction, the court will assign a private attorney, who cannot refuse the defense unless there are exceptional circumstances. 2. Annual Budget The annual budget for public defenders in 2001 was 18,336 million bolívares ($25.6 million USD), equivalent to $1.04 USD per capita (Caro Márquez, 2001). 3. Starting Salary The starting salary for a public defender in 2001 was 1.25 million bolívares per month ($1,743 USD), equivalent to 8.7 minimum wages (Caro Márquez, 2001). 4. Numbers In 2001 there were 517 public defenders in Venezuela, equivalent to 2.09/100,000 population. Of these, 356 worked in the adult criminal justice system, and 161 in the juvenile system (96 in criminal cases, 49 in protection cases, and 16 with both responsibilities) (Caro Márquez, 2001). 5. Accountability Public defenders are administratively attached to the Judicial Commission, which in turn is under the Supreme Court. They are subject to review by the Inspector General of Courts (Tribunal Supremo de Justicia, 2000), and can be sanctioned by warnings, fines, suspension for up to 6 months and termination. Public defenders are also subject to the criminal law, especially Articles 204-209 of the Penal Code (see Venezuela 1998e), and the relevant complaints must be directed to the prosecutor´s office. Section VIII: JUDICIARY 1. Administrative Organization There are three basic levels of court in Venezuela: 1.1 The Supreme Court (Tribunal Supremo) This is the highest court in the land, comprising 20 magistrates, organized in 6 chambers (salas). The Criminal Chamber has three magistrates, dealing with cases sent up from appeals courts. 1.2 Appeals Courts Appeals courts are located within each jurisdiction (23 states and the Capital District). Most states have 1 appeals court, but the most populous jurisdictions have more, giving a total of 37 appeals courts (CY 2001) in the whole country (TSJ/OPDI, 2001). 1.3 Criminal Courts Each jurisdiction has at least one preliminary, trial and supervisory court. Preliminary courts oversee case processing up to the preliminary hearing, in which the accused is asked to enter a plea, and sentence cases where guilt is admitted. Trial courts are responsible for trials and sentencing. Supervisory courts oversee the imposition of the sentence. In 2001 there were 218 preliminary courts, 149 trial courts, and 84 supervisory courts (TSJ/OPDI, 2001). There are also juvenile courts, dealing with offenses committed by adolescents (ages 12 to 17) (Venezuela, 1998c). Like the criminal courts, these are courts of "first instance" and cases may be raised to appeals courts and the Supreme Court. In 2001, there were 73 preliminary juvenile courts, 42 trial courts, and 34 supervisory courts (TSJ/OPDI, 2001). 2. Annual Budget The total budget for the judiciary in 2000 was 401,000 million bolívares ($589.7 million USD), equivalent to $23.9 USD per capita (OCEPRE, 2001). Note, however, that this figure includes the budget for 758 civil (including municipal) courts and juvenile protection courts. Adjusting expenditure according to the number of courts, approximately 177.2 million bolívares ($260.6 million USD) were spent on the 600 criminal or juvenile crime courts, equivalent to $10.6 USD per capita. 3. Number of Personnel Based on the number of courts cited above, in 2001 there were 640 criminal, juvenile crime or appeals court judges in Venezuela, equivalent to 2.6 judges per 100,000 population. 4. Qualifications and Entry Requirements Courts of "first instance" (criminal and juvenile)(CFRSJ, 2000) -- * Venezuelan nationality * lawyer * at least 5 years professional experience (including university teaching), or graduate credential and at least 2 years experience * good moral standing * no civil or political interdiction; no union activity or political party affiliation * satisfactory physical and mental health * willing to submit to periodic investigations of family wealth * computer skills. Appeals courts and Supreme Court: same as above, except that a graduate credential is required, together with a minimum of 10 years experience. Appointment is by competitive examination. 5. Initial and In-Service Training No information is available. 6. Starting Salary Approximately 1.5 million bolívares ($2,092 USD) per month, equivalent to 10.4 minimum salaries. 7. Accountability Currently, the judiciary is being restructured by the national government, and judges are overseen by the Inspector General of Tribunals (an administrative office of the Supreme Court) and by the Commission for Restructuring the Judiciary. Disciplinary procedures begin with either a complaint or an ex-oficio inquiry started by the Inspector General. In the preliminary phase, the Inspector General informs the judge that an inquiry is under way, and the judge is given the opportunity to present explanations or evidence in self-defense. Once the judge has presented a statement, the Inspector General decides whether to close the case or to make a formal accusation (accompanied by a recommendation to warn, sanction or terminate the judge). The decision must be made available to the judge, who has 5 working days to respond. Following that, the case is sent to the Restructuring Commission, which makes a final decision. If the accusation is upheld, the Commission may issue a written or verbal warning to the judge; suspend without pay, or terminate employment. The Restructuring Commission will, in the future, be replaced by a disciplinary tribunal that will review cases. 8. Technology No information is available. Section IX: PROBATION (MIJ/DGCRR, 2001) 1. Administrative Organization Probation services are attached to the Ministry of the Interior and Justice, specifically to the General Direction for Custody and Prisoner Rehabilitation. The country is divided into five regions, and each region is in turn divided into administrative jurisdictions staffed by a probation office (officially termed a "technical support unit"). Most administrative jurisdictions coincide with state boundaries, but some states have more than one probation office. The regions, and the corresponding number of probation offices, are as follows: * Capital Region -- 8 probation offices * Central Region -- 5 probation offices * Eastern Region -- 5 probation offices * Andean Region -- 6 probation offices * Western Region -- 5 probation offices. There are thus 29 probation offices around the country. 2. Annual Budget The total budget for probation services in 2000 was 2,658 million bolívares ($3.9 million USD), equivalent to $0.16 USD per capita (OCEPRE, 2001). 3. Number of Personnel As of June 2001, there were 180 probation officers, equivalent to 0.73 probation officers per 100,000 population. In May 2001 there were 3,502 offenders on probation, giving an average case load of 19.5 offenders per probation officer (table 12). The rate of offenders on probation was 14.21 per 100,000 population. However, probation officers must also supervise offenders in pre- prosecution diversion, under cautionary measures (as an alternative to preventive detention), and under the various types of early release from prison. As of May 2001, probation officers had a total of 11,676 persons under their supervision, giving an average case load of 64.8 clients per probation officer, and a rate of 47.4 per 100,000 population (table 14). 4. Qualifications and Entry Requirements By law (Venezuela, 1979), probation officers must be university graduates with a degree in law, psychology, sociology, social work or education (specialization in orientation). There are moves to include criminology graduates in this list. 5. Initial and In-Service Training For many years, new probation officers were given an initial training course lasting 6 months. However, those courses were abandoned, probably some time in the 1990s. Currently, there are plans in the Ministry of the Interior and Justice to create a University Institute of Penal Science, which would train new probation officers. Probation officers receive some in-service training courses. 6. Starting Salary Starting salary for probation officers is 300,000 bolívares per month ($418.4 USD), equivalent to 2.1 minimum wages. The salary for senior probation officers is 500,000 bolívares per month ($697.4 USD), or 3.5 minimum wages. Section X: PRISONS, JAILS, HOUSES OF CORRECTION 1. Administrative Organization A. Organization. Under Venezuelan law there are three kinds of prison facility. In line with the Penal Code, the Penitentiary Law (Venezuela, 2000c) maintains a distinction between penitentiaries (solitary confinement, forced labor) and prisons. Penitentiaries and prisons should hold offenders serving sentences of more than a year. In addition, there are judicial internment centers, governed by separate legislation dating from 1975 (Venezuela, 1975a). These centers are supposedly reserved for offenders in preventive detention (awaiting trial and sentencing) or serving sentences of less than a year. If this distinction ever existed in practice, it has long since broken down. Some prisoners are able to negotiate serving their sentence in the judicial internment center closest to their family; others are relocated because of behavioral problems; still others are transferred in order to break up prison gangs or prevent impending group violence. Thus, penitentiaries and prisons hold offenders in preventive detention; judicial internment centers hold offenders serving prison sentences of more than a year. Additionally, the architectural and regime characteristics are very similar across facilities. Only one of the original penitentiaries (in San Juan de Los Morros) retains that name (Penitenciaría General de Venezuela). For the rest, penal establishments are either termed penitentiary centers or judicial internment centers, with nothing that clearly distinguishes one type of facility from the other. Thus, incarceration facilities in Venezuela are best termed "prisons." In 1993, the national government set up the legal framework for decentralizing certain aspects of prison administration to state governments, mainly in the hope that local participation might help to alleviate some of the severe problems that affect the prison system. However, although most states with prison facilities have signed decentralization agreements, the latter have had almost no impact on prison administration or budgets. The prisons are still run by the Ministry of the Interior and Justice in Caracas (Human Rights Watch, 1997). B. Number of institutions. As of May 2001, there were 30 prison facilities, some of them administratively divided into two units. MIJ data gives a breakdown by "type" of facility (table 15). Given that jurisdiction over criminal cases is geographically divided by states, all but three of the latter (Amazonas, Cojedes, Delta Amacuro) have a prison facility (providing preventive detention services for the local courts), and some have more than one. (Amazonas and Delta Amacuro house prisoners on preventive detention in a Prefect's jail, while many convicted offenders are sent to prisons in nearby states. Cojedes uses the prison facility in neighboring Carabobo State.) Caracas has four prison facilities, with two others located in neighboring jurisdictions. In all jurisdictions except the Capital District, females are housed in annexes that are physically separate (and occasionally some distance) from the male facility. There is a specifically designated female facility in the Capital District. Note that the figures in table 15 do not include 15 Community Treatment Centers, housing about 500 convicted offenders who have been granted the open prison regime. C. Juvenile facilities. In Venezuela, juvenile offenders are housed in detention centers that are completely separate from prisons, and run by the National Institute for Minors (INAM). (See Section XI). 2. Annual Budget The total budget for prisons in 2000 was 26,327 million bolívares ($38.7 million USD), equivalent to $1.6 USD per capita (OCEPRE, 2001). 3. Number of Personnel A. Prison staff/guards. In May 2001, the Ministry of Interior and Justice reported a total of 2,120 prison staff (MIJ/DGCRR, 2001), of which 303 (14%) were classified as guards. The rest were classed as administrative positions. However, an undetermined proportion of the administrative personnel was actually working as guards. For example, the Andean Penitentiary Center (located in Mérida State) was listed as having 14 male guards, but recent research (diGiusto and Birkbeck, 2000) found that there were 44 male guards working there. Thus, the number of prison guards in the whole country is somewhere between 303 and 2,120. This gives a rate of prison guards of between 1.23 (minimum) and 8.6 (maximum) per 100,000 population. It also gives a rate of 54.9 (maximum) and 7.85 (minimum) prisoners per guard. At the Andean Penitentiary Center the rate of prisoners to the total number of guards was 22.2 per guard, but on any given shift it was 44.4 per guard (diGiusto and Birkbeck, 2000). The foregoing numbers do not include national guardsmen, who provide perimeter security at all prison facilities, control the entry and exit of persons and goods, conduct searches of prisoners and their housing quarters, and quell internal disturbances. There are no figures on the number of national guards assigned to the prison platoons. B. Prisoners. As of May 28, 2001, there were a total of 16,642 prisoners, equivalent to 67.6 prisoners per 100,000 population (MRI/DGCRR, 2001). Of these, 7,274 (44%) were in preventive detention, while the rest were serving sentences. Only 916 (nearly 6%) were female. C. Beds. Data from the Ministry of Interior and Justice shows a detailed breakdown of capacity and prison population by facility (table 16). Some care should be taken in interpreting the information. First, no technical definitions of "installed" and "maximum" capacity are available, so it is not clear how the numbers of beds were calculated. Second, the estimations of bed capacity were prepared in March 1999, while the population figures are for May 2001. Some changes over that period are relatively easy to detect, for example, the closure of the maximum security unit (C.P. Carabobo Máxima), and the near total closure of the judicial internment center in the city of Barquisimeto (I.J. Lara), to be replaced by a new prison (C.P. Centro Occidental). However, other changes, such as an increase in capacity at certain prisons between 1999 and 2001 would not be evident, although it is unlikely that such increases have been made. Venezuelan prisons were operating almost (96%) at capacity in May 2001, with some marked variations between facilities ((four were in fact operating at two or three times the installed capacity) table 16). Overcrowding, for long a negative feature of the prison system, seems to have been greatly reduced, thanks to the impact of the 1999 Criminal Procedure Code, which limited the use of preventive detention. Thus, on March 3, 1999 (just 5 months before its implementation) there were 23,597 prisoners, of whom 9,444 were serving sentences, while 14,153 were on preventive detention. On May 28, 2001, there were 16,642 prisoners, of whom 9,368 were serving sentences and 7,274 were on preventive detention (MIJ/DGCRR, 2001). While the number of sentenced offenders has remained unchanged, the number of prisoners on preventive detention has been halved, thereby reducing the size of the total prison population. However, while overcrowding has been considerably ameliorated, physical conditions in most prison facilities are still poor (Human Rights Watch, 1997). 4. Qualifications and Entry Requirements The Penitentiary Law has for long (for example, Venezuela, 1961; Venezuela, 2000c) included an article that requires the prior selection of prison staff, although no specific criteria are indicated. The Prison Service stipulates a high school degree and a psychological evaluation for would be prison guards (MIJ/DGCRR, 2001). 5. Initial and In-Service Training There have been several attempts to institute initial and in-service training for prison guards. For example, the Regulations for the 1961 Penitentiary Law (Venezuela, 1975b) set up a training school for prison staff that was to be financed and administered by the then Prison Directorate, attached to the Ministry of Justice. Apparently, the training school was not consolidated and in the 1970s an in-depth look at the prison system commented that many prison guards were hired and sent to work without any training whatsoever (Linares, 1977). This practice has continued to the present day. For example a census of prison guards at two western facilities (Barinas, Mérida) in 1999 found that almost half of them had not received training prior to starting the job (García, 2000). However, short in-service courses on law, human rights, interpersonal skills, etc., are quite common for guards and managers. In 1992, the government set up the National Institute of Penitentiary Studies, attached to the El Paraíso facility in Caracas (known more generally as La Planta), and designed to provide training for prison managers. Some of its graduates have gone on to work in the prison system. Currently, the Prison Service is planning to open a National Prison Guard Training School, which would provide 1 month of initial training for prison guards. New guards would enter under a planned career structure that provides for promotion based on years of service and in-service training. The latter would involve a technical (3 year) degree in penitentiary studies from the National Institute of Penitentiary Studies. 6. Starting Salary Starting salary for prison guards is 160,000 bolívares per month ($232.2 USD), equivalent to 1.1 minimum wages. 7. Accountability Complaints about abuses by prison guards may be made to prison directors, who are bound by the Administrative Procedures Law (Venezuela, 1981) to conduct an inquiry, possibly sanction the officer (oral and written warnings), or forward the case to the Prison Service in Caracas for a decision regarding suspension or termination. While the number of guards terminated has been quite high in some years (for example, 350 during a 7 month period in 1996 (Human Rights Watch, 1997)), neither the causes of these terminations (for example, corruption, violence, failure to report to work) or the role of prisoners' complaints in producing them are clear. Alternatively, complaints about prison guards may be made to public prosecutors, who determine whether a criminal case should be opened. Complaints about abuses by national guardsmen are also made to prosecutors, who, on finding grounds for a case, turn the matter over to military justice. In practice, accountability for individual abuses is almost non-existent. The marginal, deviant, status almost uniformly attributed to prisoners (irrespective of their guilt or innocence), combined with their segregation and isolation, effectively impede access to complaint procedures. Thus there are many serious abuses that occur with legal impunity Human Rights Watch, 1997). 8. Rehabilitation Activities Article 2 of the Penitentiary Law (Venezuela, 2000c) declares rehabilitation as a fundamental objective of the prison system. However there is considerable distance between law and reality. Administrative neglect of important tasks, that has been characteristic of the Prison Service for a very long time, is accompanied by marked deterioration (since the early 1990s) in internal order and control. In many prisons, control is in the hands of inmates (leading to frequent and serious violent conflicts among different groups), and prison staff confine their activities to administrative offices located close to the entrance. Institutional programs are rudimentary or non-existent. The exceptions to this situation are found in many of the female annexes, and in some of the male prisons in the Andean region. Article 15 of the Penitentiary Law declares work as both a right and an obligation. Some prisoners are employed by the Prison Service in maintenance, catering, or administrative tasks (for example, as clerks or teachers). The extremely low wages (2,500 to 3,000 bolívares, $3 or $4 USD, per month) are compensated by the chance to get out of the cellblocks, move around the facility, and make contact with the prison administration. The rest of prisoners who work are self-employed in informal activities, such as handicrafts and leatherwork, or food vending. Female prisoners often make clothes or toys. Many prison facilities have workshops for these activities, although there is insufficient space for all who would like to use it, causing some prisoners to work from their cramped living quarters. All informal activity relies on outside contacts (mainly family or friends) to bring in raw materials and occasionally take out the finished product for sale. Job training is not provided to prisoners, although some learn skills (for example, carpentry, filing) while working in prison. A survey of prisoners applying for sentence reductions on the basis of work (see Section X.10, below) in the Andes Penitentiary Center, found that 70% were self-employed woodworkers, 11% worked in the prison kitchens, 10% worked in building maintenance, and the rest (9%) worked as instructors, or were self-employed as artists or something else (Pérez, 2000). Given the informal nature of most prison work, it is difficult to estimate the number of prisoners who are working. In 1995, a legislative subcommittee estimated that less than 10% of all prisoners were working; a situation largely corroborated by an international human rights committee in 1996 (Human Rights Watch, 1997). Thus, idleness is a serious problem in most Venezuelan prisons. By contrast, staff at the Andes Penitentiary Center reported that more than half (59%) of convicted offenders were working in 1999. Chapter V of the Penitentiary Law provides for educational programs in prisons, giving special preference to literacy programs and adult basic education. The formal structure for these programs -- including specially designated facilities for classrooms and libraries, supervision by the Ministry of Education, and opporttunities for university education -- is quite well developed. However, the deterioration of internal conditions since the early 1990s has made large inroads into educational programs. In some of the worst affected prisons, prisoners have taken over classrooms, teachers have largely abandoned their activities, and few classes are organized. In 1995 it was estimated that only 6% of prisoners attended educational activities (Human Rights Watch, 1997). Apart from work and education, many (but not all) facilities offer opportunities for sport (especially indoor football, basketball, and in some cases baseball). Sports activities are undertaken with great enthusiasm, partly fostered by inter-facility competitions and friendly matches with local teams. Religious activities are also quite common. All prisons have a small Catholic chapel, and a part-time chaplain. In most, evangelical Protestant groups have at least as strong a presence as the Catholic Church. There are no specialized rehabilitation activities, such as group/individual therapy, anger management, or personal skills improvement, in Venezuelan prisons. 9. Conditions Venezuelan prisons are open to visitors for 5 to 6 hours, 2 days a week. At these times, anyone who cites the name of a prisoner in the facility, has a valid citizen identity card, and submits to a body search can enter the prison. Visiting usually takes place in the cellblocks and adjoining patios, with relatively few restrictions on movement. Quite large numbers of family and friends come on visiting days, temporarily giving the facility the atmosphere of a market square. These visits are vital for providing food, clothing, money and other resources to the prisoners. Both male and female prisoners are also allowed conjugal visits throughout the week, in specially designed quarters that are separate from the cellblocks. Prisoners may apply to their supervisory judge for furloughs of up to 48 hours in cases of seriousness illness or death in the immediate family, or the birth of a child. Once they have completed half of their sentence, prisoners can also apply for 48-hour furloughs to attend to pressing personal matters. The judge will also indicate whether a guard is to accompany the prisoner. Work release is available to prisoners who have completed one-quarter of their sentence, and who have obtained employment or enrolled at a University. Prisoners on work release are normally transferred to the supervision of probation officers and must spend the night at a specially designated facility. As of May 2001, there were 2,161 offenders in work release programs (table 14). Open prisons (halfway houses) are available to prisoners who have completed one-third of their sentence. As of May 2001, there were 3,002 offenders in open prison regimes. About 500 of these were residing in 1 of 19 Community Treatment Centers, and the rest had been released on special supervision that required them to return to the Centers 1 day each month. Conditional release is available to prisoners who have completed two- thirds of their sentence. There were 1,780 prisoners on conditional release in May 2001. Work release, open prison, and conditional release must be authorized by a supervisory judge. 10. Remissions A Sentence Reduction Law was passed in 1993 (Venezuela, 1993c), providing for a reduction in prison sentences of 1 day for every 2 days of work or study. "Study" is defined very broadly to include "all levels and types," as is work, which could be "production, of any economic type," or services (such as maintenance, or clerical work) undertaken for the prison facility. In order to apply for, or maintain, sentence reductions, prisoners must show good conduct. That is, they must not have participated in riots or collective fights, not escaped or tried to escape, and not have been found in possession of drugs or weapons. Requests for sentence reductions are processed by a Council for Educational and Vocational Rehabilitation at each prison facility, comprising the prison director, a local judge, and representatives from the Ministries of Education, Family and Work. The sole task of the Council is to verify the length of time prisoners have been studying or working and forward the applications to a supervisory judge who can grant the deduction. The only study so far conducted on the effect of the Sentence Reduction Law examined its application in the Andean Penitentiary Center between January 1994 and March 2000 (Pérez, 2000). The sample included 610 convicted offenders who had been released, and 419 convicted offenders who were still at the facility in March 2000. Of these, 43% had been granted sentence reductions; 89% for work and only 11% for study. The average sentence reduction was 25%. Most applications (77%) were made in conjunction with applications for other benefits, such as conditional or definitive release. Section XI: JUVENILE JUSTICE 1. Organization. On August 29, 1990, Venezuela signed and adopted into law the International Convention on Children's Rights, which set in motion the reform of its juvenile justice system. In October 1998, a new Children's Code became law (Venezuela, 1998c), marking the shift from a paternalistic to a due process model of juvenile justice. In matters of crime, juveniles are governed by the same laws as adults, that is, the Penal Code and additional criminal laws. There are no status offenses in Venezuela. However, juvenile preventive detention, adjudication, sentencing and sanctions are reserved for special institutions. The National Institute for Minors is responsible for running the juvenile detention centers, including both preventive detention and post- sentencing detention, and also for providing professional and administrative support for other actions taken with juvenile delinquents. Special juvenile courts (see Section VIII.1.3), oversee the preliminary, trial, and supervisory stages of case processing. The law distinguishes children (under age 12) from adolescents (ages 12 to 17). Although the juvenile criminal courts deal with all juvenile offenders, children are considered free from blame and responsibility. Adolescents are likewise considered free from blame, but are held responsible for their criminal acts. The juvenile court operates with the same professionals (judges, prosecutors, public defenders, etc.) and most of the same procedures (for example, oral trial) as criminal courts, except that juvenile proceedings are not public. If children are found to have committed a crime, they are subjected to a protective measure, such as improved family care and supervision, foster care, adoption, or treatment. Adolescents who have committed a crime are subjected to one of the following measures: * warning * instructions to follow certain rules * community service (not more than 8 hours a week for a maximum of 6 months) * probation (maximum 2 years) * day center (must attend during the part of the day when not at school maximum 1 year) * detention. For adolescents ages 12 to 13, the minimum period of detention is 6 months, and the maximum 2 years. For ages 14 to 17, the minimum period is 1 year, the maximum is 5 years. Detention is only used: for serious violent crimes, drug trafficking, and vehicle theft or robbery; for repeat juvenile offenders when the maximum (adult) prison sentence for the instant offense is at least 5 years; and for offenders who have violated other measures (in which case detention can be no more than 6 months). Detention is served in special juvenile facilities. If a juvenile offender on detention reaches the age of majority, he or she is transferred to an adult facility, but must always be kept separate from adult offenders. Supervisory judges can "exceptionally" authorize offenders to stay in juvenile detention centers until they are 21. Given the lack of separate facilities in prisons for juvenile offenders who have now come of age, it is likely that this "exceptional" possibility is used quite frequently. According to information provided by the National Institute for Minors (INAM, 2001), during 2000, 111,277 children and adolescents were subject to protective measures, although most of those cases would not have involved crimes. "Treatment" was provided to 17,928 children and adolescents, broken down as follows: * Preliminary Evaluation Centers (likely includes preventive detention) -- 4,228 (24%) * Diagnostic and Treatment Centers (includes post- sentence detention) -- 5,315 (30%) * External -- 4,799 (27%) * Probation -- 3,586 (20%). There were 65 treatment centers in the country in 2000, classified as follows: * Preliminary Evaluation Centers -- 8 * Diagnostic and Treatment Centers -- 49 * Farms -- 8. 2. Jurisdiction. Juveniles cannot be tried as adults. 3. Relationship to Adult Criminal Justice. Juvenile justice procedures are kept confidential, and records are not made available to the criminal court. The only exception is for cases involving both adults (processed in criminal court) and juveniles (processed in juvenile court), where relevant information may be sent from the juvenile court to the adult court. Section XII: INDIGENOUS CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEMS Of the several indigenous groups in Venezuela, the largest is the Wayuu group, located in the Guajiran Peninsula, which extends north into the Caribbean Sea and is bisected by the frontier with Colombia. The peninsula gives the more popular name to the Wayuu - Guajiran Indians. The most recent census of the Wayuu, conducted in 1992, estimated a total of 297,454 members, 57% of them living in Venezuela (OCEI, 1995). The following is a brief description of crime and justice in the Wayuu community (Segovia, 2001; in press). The Wayuu have their own definitions of crime and their own procedures for dealing with offenders. The most serious crimes are murder and rape. The latter is divided into two types: sexual relations without the consent of the woman; and sexual relations with the consent of the woman, but not of her family. Intentional injury (battery) is also considered a serious crime, and there is a distinction between blows and wounds. The latter draw blood, which is considered to be sacred because blood is believed to contain the soul of the person. To shed blood is to shed the soul, which is the property of all. Third, there are property crimes, particularly those involving livestock. The notion of accidental victimization does not exist: lack of intent does not excuse responsibility. The primary sanction is restitution, but occasionally death. Restitution is part of a symbolic world that juxtaposes contrasting categories, such as life and death, people and goods. Responsibility rests with the family rather than the individual. Given that Wayuu society is matrilineal, the responsibility for restitution lies with the maternal uncle who has the most prestige and wealth. Restitution is paid as money, jewelry, or livestock. If the family group cannot make restitution it will send a young male family member to perform labor. When a conflict derived from a crime arises between two families, the aggrieved party will choose a spokesman (putchipu) to serve as a mediator. The spokesman cannot belong to either family involved in the dispute. There is no need for an initial inquiry to establish the facts or the accused's responsibility. Crimes are believed to spring from the effects of evil spirits, and it is at least as important for the offender to acknowledge this as it is for the victim to make the accusation. The amount, type and schedule of restitution are set through negotiations between the two families, beginning with the aggrieved party, and involving the spokesman as an intermediary. Once an agreement has been reached, the two families meet on the occasion of the first payment, and the agreement is ratified by a maternal uncle representing each party. If the offending family fails to make payments, a new conflict arises, and in extreme cases the victim's family will murder a member of the other group. Murder is also exceptionally used, without prior recourse to negotiations, in response to very serious crimes, such as sexual relations without the woman's consent. Under the Constitution (Article 260), all indigenous groups are allowed to follow their own procedures for justice, provided that cases only involve group members and the procedures do not violate laws or public order. This means that the Wayuu may use restitution, but not murder, to resolve intra-group crimes. Wayuu justice is prevalent in the rural areas that were and are the original home of this indigenous group, and survives in the urban neighborhoods where Wayuu migrants have taken up residence (especially in the city of Maracaibo). Urban development, however, has brought the Wayuu into increasing contact, as victims or offenders, with other Venezuelans (64% of the Venezuelan Wayuu live in urban areas (OCEI, 1995)). Anecdotal reports indicate that Wayuu victims may occasionally propose restitution agreements for non-Wayuu offenders (for example, financial compensation for a death caused by a traffic accident). Non-Wayuu victims of Wayuu offenders usually invoke the national criminal justice system, which has no special procedures for members of indigenous groups. Recognition of cultural differences is, however, evident in Maracaibo's prison, where Wayuu prisoners are housed in a separate cellblock. Section XIII: TRANSNATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL CRIME AND JUSTICE 1. Procedures A. Extradition treaties. Extradition is governed by Title VII, Book 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and the international treaties and agreements signed by Venezuela. Extradition is classified as either active or passive. In active extradition proceedings, Venezuela requests the extradition of a person from another country, either for trial or to serve (or complete) a sentence. In these cases, a criminal court judge must submit a request for extradition to the Supreme Court, which has 30 days to make a decision. If the request is approved, the Supreme Court sends it to the Ministry of Foreign Relations, which has 60 days to present the request to the foreign government. In passive extradition proceedings, another country requests extradition of a person from Venezuelan territory. The foreign government presents the request to the Ministry of Foreign Relations, which sends it to the Supreme Court for consideration. The Supreme Court must notify the accused and hold a hearing on the matter within 30 days, at which the accused, a defense attorney and an attorney for the foreign government must be present. In certain cases, the foreign government may ask for the immediate arrest of the accused, and has 60 days to produce the documentation supporting the extradition request. Once the Supreme Court has heard both sides, it must decide on the extradition request within 15 days (Vásquez, 1999). As of May 2001, Venezuela had extradition treaties with the following countries (MRE, 2001): Country Date Signed Date Effective Gaceta Oficial Australia 11/10/1988 19/12/1993 No. 4.477, 14/10/1992 Belgium 13/03/1884 1885 ? Brazil 07/12/1938 1940 No. 20.114, 21/02/1940 Chile 02/06/1962 27/08/1965 No. 27.790, 19/07/1965 Colombia ? 1928 ? Cuba 14/07/1910 1913 No. 11.886, 04/04/1913 Italy 23/08/1930 1932 No. 17.672, 08/03/1932 Spain 04/01/1989 30/09/1990 No. 34.476, 28/05/1990 United States 19/01/1922 14/04/1923 ? The following multilateral extradition treaties have also been signed (MRE, 2001): * The Bolivarian Congress: Agreement on extradition signed by Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia. Caracas, 07/18/1911. * Convention on International Law (Bustamante Code): signed by Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru, Venezuela. Havana, 02/20/1928. * Inter-American Convention on Extradition: signed with several states. Caracas: 02/25/1981. The following extradition treaties are awaiting legislative approval (MRE, 2001): * Mexico. Signed in Caracas, 04/15/1988 * Uruguay. Signed in Caracas, 05/20/1997. Uruguay still to give legislative approval. B. Extraditions. The Ministry of Foreign Relations listed 72 "passive" extradition cases on file in June 2001. Most of these cases were initiated after 1998, but one dated from 1993. The distribution by country was as follows: Argentina 2 Belgium 2 Colombia 5 Czech Republic 1 Ecuador 1 France 2 Germany 6 Holland 2 Italy 25 Mexico 2 Panama 2 Peru 1 Spain 9 United States 12 Distribution by outcome was as follows: Approved/extradited 6 Pending 48 Denied/revoked/released 16 Detained elsewhere 2 C. Foreign prosecutions. No information available. D. Foreign prisoner transfers treaties Prisoner exchange treaties have been signed with the following countries: * Colombia, 1994 (effective 06/10/1996) * Spain, 1994 * Holland, 1998 * Denmark, 2000 (effective, 2001). Although there is no bilateral treaty with the United States, U.S. ratification (in 2001) of the Inter-American Convention on Serving Criminal Sentences Abroad (1993) would allow exchange of prisoners between the two countries. Venezuela has also made a request to the European Union to subscribe to the Strasbourg Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons (1983). If the request is approved, Venezuela could exchange prisoners with members of the European Union. E. Number of prisoners transferred. No information available. F. Mutual legal assistance treaties. Venezuela is a signatory of the 1992 Inter- American Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, ratified by Venezuelan law in 1996. 2. Foreign Law Enforcement/Justice Contacts A. Training. No information is available. B. International civilian police missions. No information is available. C. Regional policy planning. No information is available. D. Legats. No information is available. E. Joint working groups. No information is available. F. Transnational crime problems Since the mid-1980s, Venezuela has become an important transit country for drugs, which are shipped from South American producer countries to consumers in North America or Western Europe. For example, in 1997 the U.S. Department of State (1997) estimated that between 100 and 200 metric tons of cocaine pass through the country each year from Colombia. Cocaine is also shipped from Bolivia through northwest Brazil into Venezuela and then to consumer countries. Some precursor chemicals are also shipped from Venezuela to Colombia for use in cocaine processing. Drug cultivation (marijuana, coca, and opium poppy) is found in the Perijá mountain region that separates Venezuela and Colombia. International money laundering is related to drug trafficking. CONACUID (the National Commission Against the Use of Illegal Drugs) (2001) reported the seizures of drugs in Venezuela between 1990 and 2000 (table 17). During 2000, the National Guard were responsible for 72% of drug seizures, the Judicial Police (PTJ) for 19% of seizures, and the uniformed police for 9% of seizures. Four states contributed 75% of all drug seizures made during that year: Táchira (28%), Delta Amacuro (19%), Nueva Esparta (18%) and Bolívar (11%). If the U.S. Department of State's 1997 estimate of the amount of cocaine passing through Venezuela each year (100 to 200 metric tons) is correct, it is clear that only a small proportion is being detected and seized by the police (7 to 15 metric tons of cocaine in recent years). Drug related arrests, by sex, for the period 1990-2000 show the total varies considerably from year to year ((maximum, 15,734; minimum, 2,341) table 18). Most arrestees (88%) were male. Of the 2,341 persons arrested in 2000, 88% were Venezuelan. Colombians represented almost half (43%) of foreign arrestees (CONACUID, 2001) Section XIV: RESEARCH AND INFORMATION RESOURCES 1. Research Government Agencies * Ministerio del Interior y Justicia Publishes an annual report (called Estadística Delictiva) with information from the judicial police (PTJ) on reported crimes and arrests; and from the Prison Service on number of prisoners by facility, etc. * CONACUID (National Commission Against the Use of Illegal Drugs) Compiles statistics on drug seizures, arrests, and drug use. Contact: . Universities * Laboratorio de Ciencias Sociales Universidad Central de Venezuela Caracas * Instituto de Ciencias Penales y Criminológicas Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas Universidad Central de Venezuela Caracas * Instituto de Criminología "Lola Aniyar de Castro" Facultad de Derecho Universidad del Zulia Maracaibo * Centro de Investigaciones Penales y Criminológicas Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas Universidad de Los Andes Mérida . 2. Publications 2.1 Capítulo Criminológico (Published by the Instituto de Criminología, Universidad del Zulia) 2.2 Anuario del Instituto de Ciencias Penales y Criminológicas (Published by the Instituto de Ciencias Penales y Criminológicas, Universidad Central de Venezuela) 2.3 Delincuencia y Control (formerly Revista Cenipec) (Published by the Centro de Investigaciones Penales y Criminológicas, Universidad de Los Andes) 2.4 Relación Criminológica (Published by the Instituto de Ciencias Penales y Criminológicas, Universidad de Carabobo, Valencia) 3. Professional Associations * Federación de Colegios de Abogados de Venezuela (National Bar Association) * Sociedad Venezolana de Criminología Section XV: PUBLIC OPINION and SELF-HELP and VIGILANTISM 1. Survey Findings Opinion polls since the early 1990s consistently show crime is perceived as one of the country's most serious problems. In a survey carried out in September 2000, with a sample of 1,500 respondents drawn from urban areas of more than 20,000 population, crime (31% of respondents) was second only to unemployment (38%) as the country's most serious perceived problem (Cortes, 2000). In the Caracas Metropolitan Area 1996 survey on urban violence (Briceño-León et al., 1997), more than 70% of respondents reported feeling "unsafe" or "very unsafe" in different parts of the city, including when they were at home. The same survey also revealed quite negative opinions regarding the criminal justice system. Half of the respondents judged the efficiency of the courts to be "poor" or "very poor." 2. Self-Help and Vigilantism With such high levels of concern about crime and personal safety, and with only lukewarm opinions about the effectiveness of governmental crime control, it is not surprising that citizens, communities, and businesses have acted against the threat, or reality, of victimization. By far the commonest response has been to reduce the opportunities for crime by "target hardening," decreasing the exposure to strangers, and increasing surveillance. Bars on windows and doors have long been a common feature of buildings, and have been supplemented over the last decade by reinforced doors (for the wealthier) and padlocks (for the poorer). A variety of protective devices are also now routinely installed on vehicles. Target hardening has also been achieved by the acquisition of firearms. The Caracas Metropolitan Area 1996 survey on urban violence found that 9% of respondents reported keeping a firearm at home. Decreased exposure to strangers has been partly achieved by reducing the amount of time spent in public places for anything other than necessary activities. The Caracas urban violence survey found that 79% of respondents had reduced the frequency of going out at night, and 73% had reduced their recreational activities because of the fear of victimization (Briceño-León et al., 1997). Decreased exposure was also achieved by reducing access to streets and neighborhoods, and by building gated communities. Finally, greater surveillance has entailed the increased use of private security guards and night watchmen. One researcher found that in 1997 there were 522 private security companies registered with the Venezuelan government (Morais de Guerrero, 1998), and that the number of companies had grown rapidly during the 1990s. Most of these provide security services for business, industry and government, but some also provide residential protection. Information on the number of security guards was not available, but it was estimated that in 1996 the number of private security guards was approximately equal to the number of officers in the Caracas Metropolitan police force (8,000) (Morais de Guerrero, 1998). These figures and estimates exclude watchmen directly organized and financed by middle and upper class neighborhoods. In the western city of Maracaibo, the state government sponsored, beginning in 1995, Neighborhood Safety Committees that focused on linking neighborhood associations with the uniformed police in organized efforts to reduce crime, improve community organization and strengthen police-community ties. By 1997, approximately 120 committees were formed, but no evaluation of their functioning or impact was completed (Aniyar de Castro, 1999). A far less common response to the crime problem has been the use of violence against presumed criminals in some of the low-income neighborhoods of the larger cities, occasionally ending in death. These "lynchings," as they are locally known, are not recorded separately in police statistics and can only be tracked if they are reported in the press. A 1998 study found 26 cases reported during 1995 (twelve deaths, 14 injured) and 26 in 1996 (seven deaths, 19 injured) (Han Chen, 1998). Despite their relative infrequency, there appears to be widespread support for, or at least tolerance of, this kind of behavior. A 1995 national opinion survey found that 57% of respondents approved of lynchings as an alternative form of justice (Han Chen, 1998). The Caracas Metropolitan Area 1996 survey on urban violence found that 53% of respondents in low income neighborhoods, and 36% of respondents in middle and upper income neighborhoods thought that it is acceptable to take the law into one's own hands. Nor is the acceptance of extralegal responses to crime confined to civilian violence. Thirty-two percent of the sample in the same survey agreed with the statement that "the police have the right to kill criminals" (Briceño-León et al., 2000). 3. Citizen Attacks on Police or Justice System While there is great concern about crime and a widespread perception that governmental crime control is not very efficient, public attitudes toward the police and the justice system are not so much antagonistic as demanding. Citizens would like the criminal justice system to do more. Thus, a comparison of attitudes toward police role and performance in Venezuela and the United States found that responses in both countries were overwhelmingly positive, with Venezuelan respondents being slightly, but significantly, less supportive (Birkbeck, Gabaldón and LaFree, 1993). Conflict with the police appears to be individual, rather than collective, based on personal grudges or frictions with local crime networks. Nevertheless, violence against the police appears to be higher in Venezuela than in the United States. One study estimated that while approximately five civilians are killed in police- citizen encounters for every one police officer killed in the United States, in Venezuela the ratio is 3.4 civilians to each officer killed (Gabaldón, 1993). Earlier data indicate that 87% of officers were alone at the time of death, suggesting that ambushes may be a relatively frequent strategy for attacking the police (del Olmo, 1990). Section XVI: SOURCES Agudo Freites, Esteban (1973). "Notas sobre la Guardia Nacional." Revista de la Escuela Superior de las Fuerzas Armadas de Cooperación, No. 1, (Enero-Junio):263-294. Aniyar de Castro, Lolita (1999). "La participación ciudadana y la prevención del delito. Antecedentes, debates y experiencias." Capítulo Criminológico (Maracacibo) 27(2):1-29. Arráiz Luca, Rafael (2000). "La Pena de Muerte Otra Vez." El Nacional, 06/30/2000. . Accessed 06/21/2001. Arteaga, Alberto (1985). Derecho Penal Venezolano. Parte General. Caracas: Universidad Central de Venezuela. 3rd edition. Asamblea Nacional (2001) Proyecto de Ley del Cuerpo de Policía Nacional, 05/21/2001. Caracas: Asamblea Nacional. . Accessed 06/21/2001. AVESA (Asociación Venezolana para una Educación Sexual Alternativa)(2001). . Accessed 06/14/2001. Birkbeck, Christopher (1992). "Crime and Control in Venezuela." In Hans-Günther Heiland, Louise I. Shelly and Hisao Katoh (eds.), Crime and Control in Comparative Perspectives. New York: Walter de Gruyter. Birkbeck, Christopher, Luis Gabaldón, and Gary LaFree (1993). "The decision to call the police: A comparative study of the United States and Venezuela." International Criminal Justice Review 3:25-43. Birkbeck, Christopher, and Marlyng Pérez (2001a). Victims of theft and robbery in the city of Mérida. Work in progress. Birkbeck, Christopher, and Marlyng Pérez (2001b). Informe Técnico: Variables Asociadas al Incumplimiento de la Medida de Suspensión Condicional de la Ejecución de la Pena. Mérida, Venezuela: Universidad de Los Andes, Escuela de Criminología. Unpublished. Borrego, Carmelo, and Elsie Rosales (1992). Drogas y Justicia Penal. Caracas: Livrosca. Briceño-León, Roberto, et al. (1997). "La cultura emergente de la violencia en Caracas." Revista Venezolana de Economía y Ciencias Sociales (Caracas, Universidad Central de Venezuela) 3(2-3):195-214. Briceño-León, Roberto, et al. (2000). ¿Tiene la policía derecho a matar a los delincuentes? Un estudio del apoyo ciudadano a la acción extrajudicial. Paper presented at the CLACSO meeting on Violence and Society, Caracas. Casas, Cenovia (2000). "Ley de Policía Nacional Garantizará Carácter Civil del Nuevo Aparato de Seguridad." El Nacional, 11/24/2000. . Accessed 06/21/2001. Casas, Cenovia (2001). "Proponen Suspender Algunos Beneficios Procesales del COPP." El Nacional, 05/09/2001. . Accessed 06/21/2001 Caro Márquez, Asdrúbal Fernando (2001). Personal communication. CFRSJ (Comisión de Funcionamiento y Reestructuración del Sistema Judicial) (2000). Resolución por el Cual se Dicta la Reforma Parcial de las Normas de Evaluación y Concursos de Oposición para el Ingreso y Permanencia en el Poder Judicial. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 03/14/2000, No. 36.910. Chuecos, María Daniela (2001). "Proceso de creación legislativa: Proyecto de Ley Orgánica contra la Delincuencia Organizada." Revista de la Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Políticas (Caracas, Universidad Central de Venezuela) 120:295-346. COFAVIC (Comité de Familiares de las Víctimas de los Sucesos de Febrero y Marzo de 1989). . Accessed 06/14/2001. CONACUID (Comisión Nacional Contra el Uso Ilícito de las Drogas) (2001). Decomisos 2000. . Accessed 05/18/2001. Cortes, Adriana (2000). "69% de los venezolanos señala al desempleo y a la delincuencia como los peores problemas del país." El Nacional, 11/18/2000. . Accessed, 07/09/2001. Del Olmo, Rosa (1990). "Violencia policial en las calles de Caracas." pp. 217-239 in Rosa del Olmo (ed.) Segunda Ruptura Criminológica. Caracas: Universidad Central de Venezuela. di Giusto, Sharon, and Christopher Birkbeck (2000). El Uso de la Fuerza Física por Parte de los Vigilantes en una Cárcel Venezolana. Mérida: Universidad de Los Andes, Escuela de Criminología. Unpublished paper. FGR/DDC (Fiscalía General de la República/Dirección de Delitos Comunes) (2001). Statistics supplied to the author. Fundación Polar (1988). Diccionario de Historia de Venezuela. Tomo III. Caracas: Fundación Polar. Gabaldón, Luis (1993). "Police violence and uncertainty in Latin America: Linking the macro- and micro-levels of analysis." International Criminal Justice Review 3:44-59. Gabaldón, Luis (1999). "Policía y control social, 1900-1999: Fragmentación, centralización y difusión en América Latina." Capítulo Criminológico (Maracaibo) 27(3):129-150. Gabaldón, Luis Gerardo (2001). La Policía de Caracas (Venezuela). Paper presented to the International Workshop on the Use of Force by the Police, Mérida, Venezuela, March 5-7, 2001. García, Edith M. (2000). Diagnóstico de las Características de la Selección, Capacitación y el Entrenamiento del Personal Subalterno de Vigilancia y Custodia de Régimen Abierto y Régimen Cerrado en Venezuela. Mérida: Universidad de Los Andes, Escuela de Criminología. Unpublished thesis. Gómez Grillo, Elio (1979). Introducción a la Criminología. Caracas: Librería Piñango. 3rd Edition. Guerrero, Sandra (1999). "Grüber Odremán Reitera Apoyo a Aplicación de la Pena de Muerte." El Nacional, 08/26/1999. . Accessed, 06/21/2001. Han Chen, Pablo Leonte (1998). "Los linchamientos en el estado de derecho venezolano." Capítulo Criminológico (Maracaibo) 26(1):67-88. Human Rights Watch (1997). Punishment Before Trial. Prison Conditions in Venezuela. New York: Human Rights Watch. INAM (Instituto Nacional del Menor) (2001). Statistics supplied to the author. Linares, Myrla (1977). El Sistema Penitenciario Venezolano. Caracas: Universidad Central de Venezuela. López, Edgar (2001). "La Reforma Penal no Puede Ser Sometida a Referendum". El Nacional, 05/22/2001. . Accessed 07/06/2001. Maldonado, Pedro O. and Jorge L. Gaviria (2000). Drogas. Caracas: Fondo Editorial Universidad Santa María. Martínez, Deisy (2001). "Alfredo Peña Insistirá con la Cadena Perpetua ante el Parlamento." El Nacional, 04/10/01. . Accessed 21/06/01. MIJ/DGCP (Ministerio del Interior y Justicia/Dirección General de Coordinación Policial) (2001). Statistics provided to the author. MIJ/DGCRR (Ministerio del Interior y Justicia/Dirección General de Custodia y Rehabilitación del Recluso) (2001). Statistics provided to the author. Ministerio Público (2001). Statistics provided to the author. Ministerio de Relaciones Interiores (1981). Reglamento de Castigos Disciplinarios. Caracas: Ministerio de Relaciones Interiores. Mimeo. Morais de Guerrero, María (1998). "Servicios de seguridad privada en Venezuela. Políticas estatales, ordenamiento jurídico y percepción social." Capítulo Criminológico (Maracaibo) 26(2):65-97. MRE (Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores). Information provided to the author. OCEI (Oficina Central de Estadística e Informática) (1995). Censo Binacional de la Etnia Wayuu, 1992. Caracas: OCEI. OCEI (Oficina Central de Estadística e Informática) (2000). Venezuela: Estimaciones y Proyecciones de de Población 1950-2035. Caracas: OCEI. OCEPRE (2001). Distribución Institucional del Presupuesto de Gastos para el Ejercicio Fiscal 2000. . Accessed 06/23/2001. Pérez, E. (1998). Manual de Derecho Procesal Penal. Caracas: Miguel García e Hijo, S.R.L. Pérez, Nellie (2000). Efecto de la Ley de Redención Judicial de la Pena por el Trabajo y el Estudio sobre la Reducción de la Pena. Mérida: Universidad de Los Andes, Escuela de Criminología. Unpublished thesis. Poleo, Willmer (2000). Reformas del COPP y del Código Penal dependen ahora del Congresillo. El Nacional, 06/02/2000. . Accessed 07/06/2001. PROVEA (2001). Programa Venezolano de Educación- Acción en Derechos Humanos. . Accessed 06/14/2001. Rosales, Elsie (1996). "Reforma legal antidrogas y realidad judicial: El caso de la posesión de tóxicos ilegales." In Control Social y Justicia Penal en Venezuela, edited by Luis G. Gabaldón and Christopher Birkbeck. Mérida, Venezuela: Universidad de Los Andes. Segovia, Yaneth (2001). Information provided to the author. Segovia, Yaneth. "El Crimen y el Deber-Ser en la Sociedad Wayuu." Revista Cenipec (Mérida, Universidad de Los Andes) No. 19, in press. Tribunal Supremo de Justicia (2000). Normativa sobre la Dirección, Gobierno y Administración del Poder Judicial. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 08/15/2000, No. 37.014. TSJ/OPDI (Tribunal Supremo de Justicia/Oficina de Planificación y Desarrollo Institucional) (2001). Statistics provided to the author. U.S. Department of State (1997). International Narcotics Control Strategy Report: Venezuela. U.S. Department of State, Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs. Washington, D.C.: . Accessed 07/06/2001. Vásquez, M. (1999). Nuevo Derecho Procesal Penal Venezolano: Las Instituciones Básicas del Código Orgánico Procesal Penal. Caracas: Universidad Católica Andrés Bello. Venezuela (1938). Código de Justicia Militar. Caracas: Venezuela (1949). Reglamento de Castigos Disciplinarios No. 6. Caracas. Venezuela (1958). Decreto Orgánico No. 48 de la Junta de Gobierno de la República de Venezuela Mediante el Cual se Crea el Cuerpo Técnico de Policía Judicial. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 02/20/1958, No. 25.591. Venezuela (1961). Ley de Régimen Penitenciario. Caracas. Venezuela (1962). Código de Enjuiciamiento Criminal. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 02/03/1962, No. 748, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1964). Código Penal. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 06/30/1964, No. 915, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1968). Ley Aprobatoria de la Convención Única de 1961 sobre Estupefacientes. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 12/16/1968, No. 1.253, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1969). Decreto Presidencial No. 15, 19 de marzo de 1969, Mediante el Cual se Crea la Dirección de los Servicios de Inteligencia y Prevención. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial. Venezuela (1972). Ley Aprobatoria del Convenio sobre Psicotrópicos. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 01/20/1972, No. 1.506, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1975a). Reglamento de Internados Judiciales. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 09/02/1975, No. 30.784. Venezuela (1975b). Reglamento de la Ley de Regimen Penitenciario. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 10/09/1975, No. 30.816. Venezuela (1979). Ley de Sometimiento de Juicio y Suspensión Condicional de la Pena. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 12/31/1979, No. 2.529, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1981). Ley Orgánica de Procedimientos Administrativos. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 07/01/1981, No. 2.818 Extraordinario. Venezuela (1982). Ley Orgánica de Salvaguarda del Patrimonio Público. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 12/23/1982, No. 3.077, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1983). Ley Orgánica de las Fuerzas Armadas Nacionales. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 09/26/1983, No. 3.256, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1984). Ley Orgánica sobre Sustancias Estupefacientes y Psicotrópicas. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 07/17/1984, No. 3.411. Venezuela (1991). Ley Aprobatoria de la Convención Contra el Tráfico Ilícito de Estupefacientes y Sustancias Psicotrópicas. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 06/21/1991. Venezuela (1992). Ley Penal del Ambiente. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 01/03/1992, No. 4.358, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1993a). Ley Orgánica sobre Sustancias Estupefacientes y Psicotrópicas. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 09/30/1993, No. 4.636, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1993b). Ley de Beneficios en el Proceso Penal. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 08/25/1993, No. 4.620, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1993c). Ley de Redención Judicial de la Pena por el Trabajo y el Estudio. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 09/03/1993, No. 4.623, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1996). Ley de Tránsito Terrestre. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 08/09/1996, No. 5.085, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1998a). Ley Sobre la Violencia Contra la Mujer y la Familia. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 09/03/1998, No. 36.531. Venezuela (1998b). Código Orgánico Procesal Penal. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 01/23/1998, No. 5208, Extraordinario. Venezuela (1998c). Ley Orgánica para la Protección del Niño y del Adolescente. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 10/02/1998, No. 5.266 Extraordinario. Venezuela (1998d). Ley Orgánica del Ministerio Público. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 09/11/1998, No. 5262 Extraordinario. Venezuela (1998e). Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 09/11/1998, No. 5262 Extraordinario. Venezuela (1998f). Reglamento de la Ley de Tránsito Terrestre. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial. Venezuela (1998g). Ley de Reforma Parcial del Código de Justicia Militar. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial. Venezuela (1998h). Ley de Policía de Investigaciones Penales. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial. Venezuela (1999) Constitución de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 12/30/1999, No. 36.860. Venezuela (2000a). Ley de Reforma Parcial del Código Penal. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 10/20/2000, No. 5.494. Venezuela (2000b). Código Orgánico Procesal Penal. Caracas: Gaceta Oficial, 08/25/2000, No. 37.022, Extraordinario. Venezuela (2000c). Ley de Régimen Penitenciario. Caracas. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Christopher Birkbeck Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida, Venezuela ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author thanks María Eugenia Ricciardiello for assistance in preparing this report. The following individuals provided valuable help with data assembly: Ana María Sanjuan (Universidad Central de Venezuela), Ruth Araujo and Angel García (Dirección General de Custodia y Rehabilitación del Recluso, Ministerio del Interior y Justicia), Yamilet Algarin (Instituto Nacional del Menor), Asdrubal Caro (Defensoría Pública), María Eugenia Rodríguez (Comisión de la Magistratura), Dubis Urdaneta (Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores), Claudimar Riveros (Universidad de Los Andes), Marlyng Pérez (Universidad de Los Andes). End of file 06/03/03 ih