law

Since October 2023, UNRWA has faced attacks by Israel’s government, funding cuts from the US, and legal cases questioning the organisation’s neutrality. During that time, Israeli forces have killed more than 380 UNRWA staff in Gaza.

In this episode of Centre Stage, Al Jazeera’s Mohamed Hassan speaks with UNRWA’s commissioner general, Philippe Lazzarini, about Israel’s ban on the agency and what he calls a turning point for international law and the global order.

One person remains missing after a heavy avalanche engulfed a group of skiers in the Sierra Nevada mountains of the US.

Local authorities say that at least eight people have been found dead following an avalanche in the Sierra Nevada mountains of California, the deadliest incident of its kind in more than 40 years.

Nevada County Sheriff Shannon Moon said on Wednesday that rescue crews have been hindered by difficult conditions during a powerful winter storm.

One person remains missing. Six of the 15 skiers buried by the avalanche were found alive.

“We are still looking for one of the members at this time,” Moon confirmed to reporters, adding that family members have been informed that the search has moved from rescue to recovery.

The deadly incident comes as California experiences a winter storm that has deluged the mountains near the popular winter destination of Lake Tahoe with heavy snow.

The Sierra Avalanche Center warned on Wednesday that the risk of further avalanches remains high in the area as several feet of additional snow contribute to unstable conditions.

The California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services announced in a statement that it was “leading whole of government efforts to aid Nevada County”, which is located in eastern California, on the border with the neighbouring US state of Nevada.

“We are actively coordinating additional resources statewide to support avalanche search and rescue efforts to locate missing skiers near Castle Peak,” the office added.

Search-and-rescue teams were dispatched to the Castle Peak area after a call to emergency services reported that 15 people on a three-day trek had been buried by an avalanche on Tuesday morning.

“Our thoughts are with the missing individuals, their families, and first responders in the field,” the company Blackbird Mountain Guides said in a statement, noting that four guides were among those struck by the avalanche as they were returning to a trailhead.

A probation officer who was caught on video bending a teen in half.

A Torrance police officer who shot a man in the back as he walked away from a crime scene.

Seven California Highway Patrol officers who piled atop a man screaming “I can’t breathe” as he died following a drunk driving stop.

All three cases had similar outcomes: charges dropped or reduced to no time behind bars after a plea deal.

After a year in office, a pattern has emerged for L.A. County Dist. Atty. Nathan Hochman, who found himself saddled with a number of misconduct and abuse cases against police officers filed by his predecessor, George Gascón.

During his 2024 campaign, Hochman often chastised Gascón for filing cases he claimed wouldn’t hold up before a jury — while also promising to continue bringing prosecutions against police when warranted.

In recent months, Hochman has downgraded or outright dismissed charges in many high-profile cases that Gascón filed. In the two misconduct cases Hochman’s prosecutors have brought to trial, the district attorney’s office failed to win a conviction.

Those outcomes have infuriated the loved ones of victims of police violence, local activists and even former prosecutors, who say Hochman’s backslide on the issue was predictable after he received millions in campaign contributions from police unions.

Greg Apt, a former public defender who served under Gascón as second-in-command of the unit that prosecutes police cases, said he quit last year out of frustration with the new leadership.

“I had concerns that the cases were not going to be treated the same way under Hochman that they were under Gascón, that alleged police wrongdoing would not be given the same level of oversight,” he said.

Hochman has scoffed at the idea that he’s too cozy with cops to hold their feet to the fire, saying his campaign’s war chest reflected bipartisan support that included Democrats who have been critical of police.

The district attorney said he’s made decisions based on what he can actually prove in court, and argued case reviews within the Justice Systems Integrity Division have become even more rigorous under his leadership.

“I’m going to look at the facts and the law of any case. I don’t believe in the spaghetti against the wall approach where you throw the spaghetti against the wall, and see if anything sticks, and let the jury figure it out,” he said. “That would be me abdicating my responsibility.”

Hochman’s supporters argue he has restored balance to an office that was often filing cases against police that were either legally dubious or flat out unwinnable.

Tom Yu, a defense attorney who often represents cops accused of wrongdoing, said Hochman is handling things in a more fair and objective manner.

Former Torrance Police Officers Cody Weldin, center, and Christopher Tomsic, right, pleaded guilty last year in a conspiracy and vandalism case in which they allegedly spray painted a swastika on a car. Attorney Tom Yu, defense for Weldin, is seen listening to the proceedings.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

“By and large, he’s not going after the cops. But he didn’t dismiss all the cases either. I’m OK with that,” Yu said. “On a personal level, I think he’s doing a very difficult job in the police cases, because someone is always going to be unhappy with the decisions he made.”

It is difficult to win a guilty verdict for an on-duty shooting, with no such convictions in Los Angeles County since 2000. Laws governing use-of-force give officers great latitude, often protecting them even when they shoot someone who is later found to be unarmed or in situations where video evidence shows no apparent threat.

Hochman questioned why he is being criticized when the California attorney general’s office has reviewed dozens of fatal shootings of unarmed persons throughout the state since 2020 and filed no criminal cases.

“If you bring weak cases and you lose, it undercuts your credibility of being any good at your job,” Hochman said. “It undercuts your credibility in saying that we believe in the facts and the law and bringing righteous cases.”

Hochman brought 15 cases against police officers in 2025, according to documents provided to The Times in response to a public records request, compared with 17 filed by Gascón in his final year in office.

But while Gascón had a strong focus on the kinds of excessive force cases the public was clamoring to see charged when he was elected in 2020, Hochman has more often filed charges for offenses such as fraud and evidence tampering.

Hochman’s recent dismissal of charges against most of the officers involved in the death of Edward Bronstein has drawn outcry from his family and at least one former prosecutor.

Bronstein died after screaming in agony as six California Highway Patrol officers piled on top of him in Altadena in 2020. The officers were trying to get a court-ordered blood draw after Bronstein was pulled over on suspicion of drunk driving.

Video from the scene shows Bronstein arguing with the officers while handcuffed and on his knees.

The officers warn Bronstein they’re going to force him down to get a sample. Right before they do, Bronstein mumbles that he’ll “do it willingly,” but they shove him face down while a seventh officer, Sgt. Michael Little, films the encounter. A minute passes. Then Bronstein’s body goes limp.

Officers can be seen trying to revive Bronstein, calling his name and slapping the side of his head, according to the video. But several minutes elapse before officers attempt to deliver oxygen or CPR. He was pronounced dead at the scene.

Los Angeles County Dist. Atty. George Gascón announces he will ask a judge to resentence Erik and Lyle Menendez for the killing of their parents in 1989, a decision that could free the brothers.

(Allen J. Schaben / Los Angeles Times)

In 2023, Gascón filed manslaughter charges against the seven officers, as well as the nurse who carried out the blood draw. But late last year, Hochman dismissed charges against all except Little, whose case was reduced to a misdemeanor, for which he received 12 months of probation. Little is no longer a CHP officer, according to an agency spokesman.

Prosecutors are still pursuing manslaughter charges against the nurse at the scene, Arbi Baghalian. His defense attorney, Joe Weimortz, said Baghalian had no control over the officers’ actions or the decision to pursue the blood draw. Weimortz also said he believed the officers were innocent.

Bronstein’s daughter, Brianna Ortega, 26, said in a recent interview that Hochman’s decision to drop the charges felt like a betrayal.

“It just seems like because they’re cops … they must get away with it,” Ortega said. “How are you going to put the blame on one person when all of you are grown men who know better? You have common sense. You have human decency. He is literally telling you he can’t breathe.”

The Los Angeles County coroner’s office could not conclusively determine Bronstein’s cause of death but attributed it to “acute methamphetamine intoxication during restraint by law enforcement.” Bronstein’s family was paid $24 million to settle a wrongful death suit in the case.

Hochman said his office reviewed depositions from the civil case — which he said Gascón did not do before filing a case — and did not believe he could win a manslaughter case because it was impossible to say any officer specifically caused Bronstein’s death. Hochman said the officers had no intent to harm the man and were following orders of a superior officer.

“We looked at each officer, what they knew, what their state of mind was at the time. Understanding that there was both a sergeant there and a nurse, who was in charge of not only taking the blood draw but obviously doing it in a safe manner, and then deciding whether or not we could meet the legal standard of involuntary manslaughter for each officer,” he said.

Edward Tapia, the father of Edward Bronstein, speaks at a news conference about his son, a 38-year-old Burbank man who died while being restrained by California Highway Patrol officers in 2020 after refusing to have his blood drawn after a traffic stop. The family received a $24-million civil rights settlement in 2023 after filing a lawsuit against the state.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

Bronstein’s killing was one of three cases in which Hochman assigned new prosecutors in the months before a trial started or a plea deal was reached. Aside from the Bronstein case, the others ended in an acquittal or a hung jury. All three prosecutors who were removed from the unit that handles police misconduct cases had either been appointed by Gascón or had a political connection to the former district attorney.

“When somebody’s lived that case for years, and then you take them off, it suggests that you’re less than serious about winning that case,” said Apt, the former prosecutor on the Bronstein case.

Hochman said he was simply bringing in staff with more trial experience on each case, insisting politics had nothing to do with the transfers. One of the cases, which involved allegations of perjury against L.A. County sheriff’s deputies Jonathan Miramontes and Woodrow Kim, ended with a lightning fast acquittal. Records show jurors deliberated less than an hour before coming back with a not guilty verdict.

In the other case, Hochman’s staff came closer to convicting a cop for an on-duty shooting than anyone else has in L.A. County in a quarter-century.

Former Whittier police officers Salvador Murillo, left, and Cynthia Lopez during their arraignment at the Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center in Los Angeles. Murillo was charged in a 2020 shooting that left an unarmed man paralyzed. Murillo’s trial ended with a deadlocked jury in November 2025.

(Mel Melcon / Los Angeles Times)

Former Whittier Det. Salvador Murillo stood trial in November for shooting an unarmed man in the back as he fled down an alley in 2023. Nicholas Carrillo ran away on foot from a vehicle stop and was leaping over a fence — unarmed — when Murillo squeezed off four rounds. Two severed Carillo’s spine, paralyzing him.

The jury came back deadlocked, although a majority of the panel was leaning toward a conviction. Hochman said it is likely he will ask prosecutors to take Murillo to trial a second time, though a final decision has not been made.

This year, Hochman will have to weigh in on a pair of politically charged police killings.

Keith Porter Jr., a 43-year-old father of two, was shot to death by an off-duty U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent on New Year’s Eve, a case that has gained national attention following outcry over on-duty shootings by ICE officers in Minnesota and elsewhere.

The Department of Homeland Security said the off-duty ICE agent was responding to an “active shooter.” Porter’s family has said he was firing a rifle into the air as a celebration to ring in the new year.

Melina Abdullah, the co-founder of Black Lives Matter L.A., was part of a group that met with Hochman about Porter’s killing and other cases last month in South L.A.

She described the encounter as confrontational — and a disaster.

“I don’t know how we can expect any safety and accountability with this man in office,” Abdullah said.

Hochman must also decide how to proceed with the case of Clifford Proctor, a former LAPD officer charged for shooting an unarmed homeless man in the back in 2015.

Proctor left the LAPD in 2017 and was not indicted on murder charges until 2024. Gascón reopened the case in 2021, after prosecutors previously declined to file charges.

On Monday, The Times revealed Proctor was able to fly overseas and live at home for a year without the district attorney’s office making any attempt to arrest him on an active murder warrant in 2025.

Hochman has not said if he intends to take Proctor to trial.

Hochman said that while he knows cases of police violence drive emotional reactions, he has to constrain himself to a cold analysis of the facts in front of him.

Reflecting on his confrontational meeting with Black Lives Matter activists, which centered on his recent move to dismiss charges in the 2018 killing of Christopher Deandre Mitchell by Torrance police officers, Hochman said he can’t pursue cases just because people are upset.

“They couldn’t point out anything in that analysis that they disagreed with,” he said. “Other than the result.”

The defense ministry said Friday it has relieved Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Kang Dong-gil from duty over his alleged involvement in former President Yoon Suk Yeol’s botched martial law bid in late 2024.

The move came a day after the ministry took a similar action against Ground Operations Commander Gen. Joo Sung-un over suspicions of martial law involvement, marking the second such suspension of a four-star general appointed under President Lee Jae Myung’s administration.

“The defense ministry excluded the chief of naval operations as of Friday as allegations in relation to the insurrection case have been identified,” ministry spokesperson Chung Binna said in a briefing.

Kang, who served as chief of the directorate of military support at the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time of the martial law imposition, was among the seven top-brass officers appointed as four-star generals in September last year.

The allegations involving Kang and Joo were not previously verified ahead of their appointment, a ministry official said, acknowledging limitations in the procedure amid efforts to fill the leadership vacuum caused by the martial law bid.

The official said the ministry continues to firmly carry out measures to determine the circumstances surrounding the martial law imposition, regardless of the ranks of personnel involved.

The deputy chief of the Navy will serve as acting Navy chief following Friday’s decision, the ministry said, adding disciplinary action will be considered for Kang.

On Thursday, the ministry said it has identified around 180 personnel as having been involved in the martial law imposition following a monthslong probe into about 860 general-level and field-grade officers.

It also concluded that some 1,600 personnel across the military affiliated with the Army, counterintelligence command, special operations command and Defense Intelligence Command were found to have been mobilized on the night of the martial law imposition.

Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.

With astonishing speed amid so many postponed emergencies, the reform of the Organic Law on Hydrocarbons, enacted in 2006 by President Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías, has been approved. Amending the work of such a towering figure requires prudence and restraint. Let us examine the result.

First of all, what stands out is the unconstitutional attempt to repeal Article 151 of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic through Article 8 of a simple law, which proposes:

Article 8. Any doubts or disputes of any nature that may arise in connection with the activities covered by this Law and that cannot be resolved amicably by the parties may be decided by the competent courts of the Republic or through alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, including mediation and independent arbitration.

This article directly contradicts Article 151 of the Venezuelan Constitution:

Article 151. In the public interest contracts, unless inapplicable by reason of the nature of such contracts, a clause shall be deemed included even if not expressed, whereby any doubts and controversies which may raise concerning such contracts and which cannot be resolved amicably by the contracting parties, shall be decided by the competent courts of the Republic, in accordance with its laws and shall not on any grounds or for any reason give rise to foreign claims.

There is no doubt that the Constitution of the Republic is the Supreme Law of the Nation and therefore cannot be repealed by a lesser legal norm. Contracts on hydrocarbons are in the public interest, as Article 12 of our Constitution considers them to be “public domain assets”:

Article 12. Mineral and hydrocarbon deposits of any nature that exist within the territory of the nation, beneath the territorial sea bed, within the exclusive economic zone and on the continental sheaf, are the property of the Republic, are of public domain, and therefore inalienable and not transferable. The seacoasts are public domain property.

Articles 103, 126, paragraph 12, and 136, paragraphs 8 and 10, as well as Article 156, paragraphs 12 and 16 of the Constitution assign the same classification of public interest and public domain to mines and hydrocarbons.

This is a harmonious development of what Article 1 of our Constitution considers “Fundamental Principles”: immunity, the sovereign power not to be subject to foreign courts or jurisdictional bodies to decide disputes of internal public interest: “The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is irrevocably free and independent, basing its moral property and values of freedom, equality, justice and international peace on the doctrine of Simón Bolívar, the Liberator. Independence, liberty, sovereignty, immunity, territorial integrity and national self-determination are unrenounceable rights of the Nation.”

These are not mere abstract principles. Sovereignty is the absolute and perpetual power of a political body to make its own laws, enforce them, and resolve for itself any disputes that may arise from their application. A state that loses any of these powers ceases to be sovereign and independent. This is what happens when we agree to resolve disputes over internal public interest issues not through our courts and laws, but “through alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, including mediation and independent arbitration.” Precisely because we handed over the resolution of the dispute concerning our sovereignty over Guayana Esequiba to “independent arbitration” [in 1899], that territory was taken from us.

Venezuela has systematically lost almost all disputes on matters of public interest brought before foreign bodies, which is why we withdrew from the infamous ICSID (International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, part of the World Bank) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR, part of the OAS).

In short, if we allow external courts to decide on matters of public interest, how can we oppose foreign courts also judging our legitimate President Nicolás Maduro Moros and his wife, Congresswoman Cilia Flores, according to foreign laws?

The law we are examining includes numerous other objectionable proposals. Among them, Article 34 establishes that the creation of joint ventures and their operating conditions require only the mere “notification” of the National Assembly, which has no decision-making powers in matters so fundamental to the interests of the nation.

Articles 35, 36, 37, 38, and 40 [of the reform] progressively grant joint ventures and minority partners authority for the extraction, management, and commercialization of hydrocarbons, which Article 302 of our Constitution reserves for the Republic:

Article 302. The State reserves to itself, through the pertinent organic law, and for reasons of national expediency, the petroleum industry and other industries, operations and goods and services which are in the public interest and of a strategic nature. The State shall promote the domestic manufacture of raw materials deriving from the exploitation of nonrenewable natural resources, with a view to assimilating, creating and inventing technologies, generating employment and economic growth and creating wealth and wellbeing for the people.

Article 41 of the aforementioned law authorizes private companies to carry out the “integrated management” of exploitation, receiving crude oil as payment, which displaces PDVSA and the State from their decisive functions in the industry, as set forth in the aforementioned Article 302 of our Constitution.

Article 52 of the recently approved reform empowers the executive branch to reduce the amount of royalties at will when it is demonstrated “to its satisfaction” that the project’s economic needs justify it. It should be noted that the previous [2006] law allowed the nation to receive between 60% and 65% in royalties and taxes, while the provisions of the recently amended law allow multinationals to reduce this contribution to below 15%, depending on the category of assets and activity. This represents a significant reduction in public revenue from this source of up to 50% in favor of private operators, almost all of which are foreign.

Article 56 of the recently amended law defines a 15% “integrated hydrocarbon tax” but the executive is also allowed to reduce it at its discretion. Ultimately the national fiscal share can go down from 65% to 25%.

On the sensitive issue of royalties, Andrés Giuseppe noted in a study dated January 28, 2026 (Poli-data.com): 

This report thoroughly analyzes the premise that royalties, as compensation for the depletion of a non-renewable asset, should be inalienable and non-negotiable, and argues that any incentives for the industry should be limited to the scope of taxes on profits and not to the owner’s gross share. (…) The transition from the current legal framework to the 2026 proposal represents a significant change in the protection of oil revenues. While the [2006] law strictly limits the conditions under which payments to the State can be reduced, the reform expands the discretion of the National Executive. The 2026 reform introduces greater flexibility that, in practice, weakens the concept of royalties as a “floor” for state participation. Under the 2006 law, the reduction to 20% was restricted to specific fields with proven geological difficulties; in contrast, the new Article 52 allows the National Executive to reduce the royalty at its discretion for any project, provided that the lack of economic viability is demonstrated “to its satisfaction” (,,,) The oil royalty, historically linked to jus regale, represents the compensation that the exploiter of a non-renewable natural resource owes to the State for the right to extract and appropriate an asset that belongs to the public domain. In Venezuelan doctrine, this concept is based on Article 12 of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, which establishes that hydrocarbon deposits are public property, inalienable, and imprescriptible.

The royalty, therefore, is non-negotiable and cannot be diverted from its spirit, purpose, and rationale to satisfy other legal obligations arising from different causes and motivations. Furthermore, the Organic Law on National Public Finance establishes: “Article 5. Under no circumstances is compensation against the Treasury admissible, regardless of the origin and nature of the credits to be compensated.” 

Compensation is an institution of private law whereby an individual can extinguish a debt with another individual by offsetting it against a debt that he or she has with that individual. As we can see, the Organic Law on National Public Finance itself, which has specific jurisdiction in tax matters, categorically prohibits it, which means that a citizen cannot cancel the payment of royalties on the grounds that he or she used that debt to satisfy another obligation.

In summary, numerous provisions of the recently reformed Organic Law on Hydrocarbons tend to diminish the Republic’s exclusive jurisdiction over hydrocarbon exploitation, enabling a gradual privatization of the industry. Other provisions make significant reductions in public revenue dependent on the discretion of officials, which do not take into account the real value of the hydrocarbons extracted but rather the alleged economic situation of the private company involved in the project. The overal result will be to significantly reduce the revenue generated by these resources, jeopardizing the financial management of state oil company PDVSA and that of the Republic itself.

Translated and with minor edits by Venezuelanalysis.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Venezuelanalysis editorial staff.

Source: Luis Britto García

If you get caught out with this travel essential, it could cost you hundreds of pounds

If you’re jetting off to Italy this summer, it’s vital to familiarise yourself with the local regulations. There’s a lesser-known rule that applies to both residents and tourists, though it’s far more likely to trip up visitors.

This is because it concerns something most holidaymakers habitually carry — a water bottle. On the Italian island of Capri in the Gulf of Naples, single-use plastics have been banned.

With approximately 2.7 million tourists visiting annually, it was essential to mitigate the environmental impact of this influx, reports the Express.

This means plastic bags, bottles, straws and cutlery are forbidden on the island. Despite the ban being enforced for several years, specialists at John Mason International Movers report it continues to surprise people regularly.

Executive director Simon Hood said: “The island’s authorities are becoming increasingly worried about the effects of the growing tourism numbers on the local population and environment.”

“In 2019, a ban on single-use plastics came into force, banning plastic bags, cups, utensils, water bottles, straws and even coffee stirrers. Authorities have been empowered to fine those caught swigging from a plastic bottle up to €500 [around £435] – it may seem excessive, but it is well intentioned.”

He noted that the restriction frequently surprises visitors, as they don’t anticipate it.

Simon explained: “Capri isn’t a municipality historically recognised for environmental work. The long-standing association of the island being a hotspot with movie stars, A-list celebs, and influencers has traditionally meant many of these concerns were ignored but mass tourism has seen changes come thick and fast in recent years.”

The rule primarily targets bars and restaurants, though the bulk of Capri’s tourism arrives as daytrippers travelling by ferry from Naples. These visitors are highly likely to bring single-use plastic water bottles with them, which is precisely how they fall foul of the rules.

Simon stated: “It’s something that would catch me out; the ban aimed at bars and restaurants has influenced what can be bought and sold locally. But for the day trippers, the likelihood you’ll bring a non-biodegradable plastic bottle on your trip is high.

“Considering this, I’d say think twice and consider whether you want to run the risk of receiving a €500 fine.”

Joined by survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuses, US Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer introduced legislation to end the federal statute of limitations that has shielded sex traffickers. It’s named for Virginia Giuffre, one of the late sex offender’s most prominent accusers.

Mérida, February 9, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The Venezuelan National Assembly has launched discussions on a preliminarily-approved “Amnesty Bill for Democratic Coexistence,” including public consultations with community peace judges, NGOs and academics. 

Deputy Jorge Arreaza, who heads the parliament’s special commission for the amnesty bill, said that the legislature’s intention was to shape the law as a mechanism to ensure political stability in Venezuela but without impunity.

“The goal of this law is to contribute to peace, democratic coexistence and national reconciliation,” he explained during a meeting with community peace judges on Sunday. “It is a necessity of the new political moment we are going through.” Arreaza had previously served as Foreign Minister and Communes Minister.

The National Assembly commission’s consultations included a meeting with NGOs such as Provea, Foro Penal, and Acceso a la Justicia on Saturday. One they earlier, the legislators hosted deans from sixteen public and private university law schools to receive their input on the project. 

During these meetings, Arreaza stressed the importance of community justice participation, civil society organisations and academia. 

“We went to the law, reviewed each of the contributions, and will conduct an evaluation. We must contribute to the dialogue; we must listen to each other with patience and empathy,” he emphasized.

The Amnesty Bill for Democratic Coexistence, first announced by Acting President Delcy Rodríguez on January 30, was approved in its first reading on Thursday. A revised text is expected to be submitted to a final vote in the coming weeks.

The central stated objective of the initiative is national reconciliation and social peace through the pardon of political and related crimes committed between January 1, 1999, and January 30, 2026. 

According to Venezuelan authorities, the project aims to address the political conflict that occurred between 1999 and 2026 by channelling differences through constitutional means, as well as modernise the legal system to help secure social peace.

The bill’s Article 6 explains that the selected period covers significant conflicts such as the 2002 coup d’État, the 2002-03 oil lockout and opposition-led violent street protests in 2013, 2014 and 2017.

However, the bill sets strict limits, excluding those responsible for serious human rights violations, crimes against humanity, homicide, drug trafficking, and corruption from any benefits. In addition to the release of those who have been prosecuted or convicted, the law establishes the termination of legal proceedings and the removal of criminal records from police and military files for those who benefit from it.

The Venezuelan government’s consultations likewise included a meeting between Acting President Delcy Rodríguez and former Spanish President José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero in Caracas on Friday. Zapatero, who has mediated past dialogue initiatives with the Venezuelan opposition, expressed his support for the Amnesty Bill, considering that it will mark “a turning point” for the country’s future and reconciliation.

He emphasized that the amnesty should be as extensive as possible and implemented swiftly to meet the expectations of families affected by arrests. Zapatero pledged to assist in any requested way, arguing that forgiveness and dialogue are essential elements in what he described as an “extraordinary moment” for the Caribbean nation.

Amid amnesty debates, the Committee of Family and Friends for the Freedom of Imprisoned Workers demanded that the legislation extend to imprisoned workers who have been criminalized on charges of ‘terrorism’ and ‘treason’ for defending labor rights or speaking out against corruption.

In a statement, the committee argued that the amnesty should not be limited to high-profile political figures, but rather apply to working-class and grassroots activists as well. 

Investigative blog La Tabla also put forward a proposal to expand the removal of charges and convictions to campesino leaders who have been targeted amid ongoing land struggles. In recent years, rural organizations have denounced a growing criminalization of local activists, accusing judicial authorities of favoring landowning interests.

Releases of high-profile opposition figures continue

In recent days, Venezuelan judicial authorities have continued a process of prisoner releases which, according to the President of the National Assembly, Jorge Rodríguez, are intended to promote national reconciliation. The Venezuelan government has reported around 900 releases since December.

Rodríguez recently announced that further detainees would be released this week, describing the process as an “act of justice and forgiveness.” The people released are still facing trial, with charges against high-profile anti-government figures including “terrorism” and “treason.”

NGO Foro Penal reported the release of dozens of opposition politicians on Sunday, including several associates of far-right leader María Corina Machado. However, hours after exiting prison, former Deputy Juan Pablo Guanipa was arrested again in Caracas.

The Venezuelan Attorney General’s Office published a statement arguing that Guanipa had violated the conditions of his release, though it did not offer specifics, and requesting a court order to move him to house arrest.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.