Legal Em Venezuela

The government has used the COVID-19 state of emergency as a pretext to crack down on dissent by arbitrarily arresting and prosecuting dozens of political opponents, including lawmakers, journalists, health workers critical of the government`s handling of the pandemic, and lawyers protesting protesters protesting lack of access to water. gasoline or medication. provide legal support. Migrants must also meet strict requirements to be admissible. You must apply from abroad; All migrants who cross the U.S. border illegally will be disqualified. They also need a financial sponsor in the United States who can support them. The Venezuelan legal system belongs to the tradition of continental law. Venezuela was the first country in the world to abolish the death penalty for all crimes in 1863.

[1] Other non-profit legal forms, such as religious congregations and political parties, do not fall within the scope of this note because of their limited interaction with foreign constituents. The note also excludes co-operatives and municipal councils. [1] This report describes the legal framework for non-profit organizations (also known as non-governmental organizations or NGOs) in Venezuela and includes translations of relevant legislation for a foundation or consultant conducting an equivalency determination of a foreign beneficiary pursuant to IRS Tax Procedure 92-94. The exodus of Venezuelans fleeing repression and shortages of food, medicine and medical care represents the largest migration crisis in Latin America`s recent history. Difficulties in accessing legal status in other countries and economic difficulties resulting from measures taken to contain the spread of Covid-19 have led to the return of around 130,000 people since March 2020. Returnees are ill-treated upon arrival. Finally, the Organic Law of Science, Technology and Innovation (Ley Orgánica de Ciencia, Tecnologia e Innovación) encourages the development of scientific, innovative and technological activities in Venezuela. According to the law, any legal person declaring an annual gross income exceeding 100,000 contributions (tax units) must make an annual contribution equal to a certain percentage of its gross income to an activity in the fields of science, technology or innovation. The contribution required varies according to the type of economic activity carried out by the enterprise (Organic Law on Science, Technology and Innovation, Article 26). The Organic Law on Drugs, which entered into force on 15 September 2010, provides that donations from natural or legal persons to drug prevention programmes and projects may be deductible, giving preference to programmes for the protection of children and young people.

This law also requires all for-profit legal entities, consortia or public entities with 50 or more employees to contribute 1% of their revenues to the National Drug Control Fund, which in turn directs these contributions to programs to prevent drug use and trafficking. The Organic Law on Drugs repealed the Ley Orgánica Contra el Tráfico Ilícito y el Consumo de Sustancias Estupefacientes y Psicotrópicas (1996) (Organic Law against Trafficking in and Use of Illicit Substances). Illegal mining in Bolívar state is controlled by criminal groups – “trade unions” – that monitor citizens, impose abusive working conditions and brutally treat, sometimes dismember and kill those accused of theft and other crimes. Trade unions operate with the consent of the government and sometimes with participation. The Venezuela-related sanctions program represents the implementation of several judicial authorities. Some of these powers take the form of implementing regulations issued by the President. Other authorities are public laws (statutes) adopted by Congress. These powers are also codified by OFAC in its regulations, which are published in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Changes to these terms will be posted on the Federal Register. In July, Javier Tarazona, Rafael Tarazona and Omar de Dios García, members of the local NGO FundaREDES, were arbitrarily arrested by SEBIN agents.

They were charged with incitement to hatred, treason and “terrorism”. Despite numerous requests, the legal representatives they elected were denied accreditation to appear in court. All three were awaiting the first hearings before the trial at the end of the year. Rafael Tarazona and Omar de Dios García were conditionally released in October. Javier Tarazona, whose health condition was serious and in need of urgent treatment, remained in detention. The situation of the Orinoco Mining Arc and illegal mining remains a matter of concern and continues to seriously undermine the rights of indigenous peoples exposed to human rights violations such as labour exploitation and gender-based violence. The Biden administration wants to prevent migrants from embarking on this long and dangerous journey. Last week, the United States and Mexico announced a deal that would allow immigration authorities to quickly deport Venezuelan migrants if they cross the border illegally. Non-profit and welfare organizations are not different types of legal entities, but special designations that are given to authorized associations and foundations. Until 1998, Venezuelan criminal law was regulated by the Código de Enjuiciamiento Criminal of 1926. The 1926 trials “followed many of the traditional rules of the inquisitorial tradition”[3], with pre-trial preparation essentially under the control of the judge. In the first stage of sumario, a judge would direct the police investigation; And after being arrested by police, the judge had 72 hours to decide whether the suspects should remain in custody.

In the second plenary stage, the trial became more adversarial and trial documents were provided to the accused, but the judge still had “broad discretion to pursue charges beyond those set out in the indictment.” [3] The 1926 Code was introduced by dictator Juan Vicente Gómez and represented a major change from the procedures of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when Venezuela held jury trials and oral trials in some states. [3] Gómez standardized legal procedures and eliminated jurors. [3] For legal reasons, Venezuelan NPOs are allowed to promote laws and support candidates, except during election periods when political campaigning is prohibited. They may also conduct advocacy activities on behalf of or in support of their target audiences and to protect their respective organizations or collective interests. Less than a year after the adoption of the new penal code, commissions were formed to consider a revision. [3] The first reform of March 2000 [3] reintroduced, inter alia, the former 72-hour time limit for judicial decisions on custodial sentences. The reform was described as “a necessary defense of society against crime,” implying that the new code was ill-suited to Venezuelan society and too lenient towards criminals. [3] Further amendments in November 2001 introduced a significant number of amendments that “left very little of the original spirit of the 1998 Code.” [3] Jury trials were abolished and, among other things, prosecutors were given six months to continue the trial or drop the charges. [3] In the years 1999-2001, a large proportion of jury trials were postponed because a number of problems related to the new jury approach still needed to be resolved. However, other delays contributed significantly to the postponement. [3] Although the number of criminal judges more than doubled between 1998 and 2004, the number of prosecutors did not increase significantly despite the increased importance of this office in the judicial system.

[3] The Venezuelan general budget estimated the number of cases per prosecutor at 2900 in 2004 and 4000 in 2006. [3] Like any natural or legal person, a non-profit organisation may engage in any type of lawful economic activity. He can buy, sell and mortgage real estate, real estate and personal property; make domestic or foreign investments; and buying shares in companies and receiving dividends. GENEVA (16 September 2021) – Repeated due process violations in Venezuela expose a judiciary without independence that has left serious human rights violations against government opponents unchecked, both men and women, according to a new United Nations report released today. In its second report, the United Nations Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela describes how deficiencies in the justice system since 2014 go hand in hand with a series of serious human rights violations and crimes under international law in the context of a policy of silence, discouragement and repression of government opposition. The commission based its findings on 177 interviews – many with judicial system actors – as well as a survey of former Venezuelan judges, prosecutors and defense lawyers, and a comprehensive analysis of thousands of pages of court records and other official documents. It conducted a detailed analysis of 183 arrests of real or perceived opponents of the government (153 men and 30 women, about half of them civilians and the other half military) between 2014 and August 2021 and documented irregularities affecting all stages of criminal proceedings. “In the midst of Venezuela`s deep human rights crisis, the independence of the judiciary has been deeply compromised, compromising its role in communicating justice and protecting individual rights,” said Marta Valiñas, chairperson of the mission. “Our recent investigation revealed reasonable grounds to believe that judges and prosecutors, under increasing political pressure through their actions and omissions, have played a significant role in serious violations and crimes committed against real or perceived opponents by various state actors in Venezuela.” Perpetuating impunity In recent years, public officials, some at high levels, have been able to commit violations and crimes with impunity in Venezuela.