Case Summary and Outcome

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights found that conditions of seriousness, urgency, and risk of irreparable harm continued to exist in Venezuela, justifying the maintenance and strengthening of precautionary measures in favor of María Corina Machado. Ms. Machado argued that her prominence as an opposition leader, along with her public denunciations and political mobilization efforts, exposed her to an increasingly serious risk to her life and personal integrity. She cited threats, harassment, surveillance, attacks, sabotage, and a broader context of potential criminalization—including domestic rulings disqualifying her from political participation and announcements of criminal investigations—which, she contended, forced her to adopt private security measures and eventually go into hiding. Venezuela, for its part, failed to respond to the Commission’s requests and did not comply with previously ordered precautionary measures. The Commission emphasized the country’s weakened rule of law and ongoing patterns of persecution and stigmatization against dissenting voices. It also noted that the risks faced by Ms. Machado intensified following the 2024 electoral process, with potential chilling effects on the opposition and public debate. Consequently, the Commission required the State to adopt measures to protect Ms. Machado’s life and personal integrity; ensure she can continue participating in political life free from threats, harassment, or violence; agree on the necessary measures with her and her representatives; and investigate the reported incidents with due diligence, including examining possible involvement of State agents.

---

Facts

On April 12, 2019, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights granted precautionary measures in favor of María Corina Machado Parisca, through Resolution 22/2019, after considering that she faced a situation of seriousness and urgency due to threats and acts of harassment allegedly linked to her political activity in Venezuela.[1] María Corina Machado Parisca is a prominent Venezuelan politician and activist, National Coordinator of the opposition party Vente Venezuela, a former member of the National Assembly, and a leading figure in organizing protests against the Chávez and Maduro regimes who has also run as a candidate in presidential elections. After assessing the facts and legal grounds, the IACHR concluded that her rights were at risk of suffering irreparable harm and, pursuant to Article 25 of its Rules of Procedure, requested that the Venezuelan State adopt measures to protect her life and personal integrity, ensure that she could continue carrying out her political activities without threats or violence, and report on the actions taken to investigate the facts and prevent their recurrence.

On December 19, 2023, the IACHR issued a follow-up resolution on the precautionary measures, in which it took into account the increase in stigmatizing discourse by public officials, as well as multiple incidents of harassment, death threats, and attacks against María Corina Machado. The Commission underscored her “role as the most visible opposition figure in the electoral context at the time, along with the unique challenges and impact she faced as a woman in politics.” [para. 3] Upon finding that a situation of seriousness and urgency persisted under Article 25 of its Rules of Procedure, the Commission decided to continue monitoring the measures, request specific and updated information from the State regarding their implementation, and require it to effectively protect the beneficiary’s life and personal integrity, ensure that she could continue exercising her political activities without threats or violence, and investigate the reported facts with due diligence —including those involving State agents— in order to prevent their recurrence.[2]

On October 3, 2024, Maria Corina Machado requested an update to the precautionary measures granted in her favor. She explained that, on December 15, 2023, after learning that a political disqualification against her had been confirmed, her representatives filed an application for precautionary amparo before the Political-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ). On January 26, 2024, the TSJ dismissed the amparo as inadmissible and confirmed that Machado had been disqualified from holding public office for a period of fifteen years, on the basis of a 2021 resolution by the Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic.

Ms. Machado explained that, in the absence of State protection, she had to hire private security personnel. She stated that, on February 7, 2024, during a political event in Charavalle, Miranda state, Machado and members of her party Vente Venezuela were attacked with stones and sticks by groups identified as “chavistas,” leaving several party leaders injured. She clarified that she managed to take shelter. Ms. Machado also reported that the attacks intensified during the opposition’s presidential campaign and that State agents followed and harassed her and her team in various states across the country.

She added that, on July 17, 2024, Milcíades Ávila, Ms. Machado’s head of security, was detained while asleep. The following day, within a private gated community with security, the vehicles of Ms. Machado and her team were vandalized. She indicated that paint was thrown on the windshields, the engine oil was drained, both vehicles were damaged, and the brake hoses of one of the vehicles were cut. However, she added that the Attorney General stated that it was a “false positive” and announced a criminal investigation against a member of Machado’s party, accused of staging the events. [para. 8]

Also, she explained that, during the presidential campaign, she was subjected to the blocking of venues for her political events, sudden closures of highways with the presence of security forces, arbitrary disruptions of campaign events, and sabotage attempts by motorcyclists linked to the government. She also reported that at least nine hotels and restaurants visited by her and her team were shut down. In this context, President Nicolás Maduro declared that there would be a bloodbath if he did not prevail in the July 28, 2024 elections.

Further, she stated that presidential elections were held in Venezuela on July 28, 2024, that Edmundo González Urrutia, of the “Plataforma Unitaria,” won in accordance with official voting records, but that the National Electoral Council announced Mr. Nicolás Maduro as the winner, which she denounced as electoral fraud. According to Ms. Machado, the National Electoral Council did not publish official results, alleging a hack, and in the subsequent period there was a context of post-election repression in response to peaceful demonstrations linked to the government’s failure to recognize the results.

Ms. Machado stated that a judgment of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice that confirmed the validity of the results issued by the National Electoral Council ordered the Attorney General to determine responsibilities for the dissemination of “allegedly false documents” uploaded to the website where opposition voting records were published, as well as to investigate the cyberattack. [para. 13] She added that the Attorney General threatened to charge her and her team with the crime of homicide for the death of 25 people in the context of protests, attributing to them a destabilization plan. [para. 13].

Moreover, she argued that, on September 2, 2024, a judge with jurisdiction over cases linked to offenses associated with terrorism issued an arrest warrant against Edmundo González for various crimes, which allegedly led him to request diplomatic asylum and temporarily go into exile in Spain. She explained that this increased her risk, as she remained the only opposition figure defending the results of the July 28 election in the country, with serious rumors that an arrest warrant will be issued against her.

She alleged that, on October 3, 2024, she and Edmundo González issued a statement addressed to the State’s security forces, calling on them to respect the electoral results and not repress protests. In response, the Attorney General announced an investigation for offenses such as usurpation of functions, dissemination of false information to cause alarm, incitement to disobey the law, incitement to insurrection, association to commit crimes, and conspiracy. She also referred to the possible existence of an arrest warrant against her, of which she was not notified. She added that there were public statements by high-ranking officials requesting or threatening imprisonment for Ms. Machado.

Furthermore, she reported that, in the early morning hours of August 2, 2024, at the main headquarters of the “Comando Con Venezuela” —Ms. Machado’s political office— six armed men with covered faces and no identification subdued and threatened security guards, broke down doors, marked walls, and took documents and equipment. According to Ms. Machado, she had to go into hiding and expressed fear for her life in light of threats of arrest warrants and public intimidation and harassment by authorities. She also stated that Nicolás Maduro had labeled her a fugitive from justice and a terrorist, urging the attorney general to negotiate her surrender to justice.

Finally, she added that, on October 11, 2024, Milcíades Ávila and Edwin Moya, both members of Ms. Machado’s security team, had been detained on September 29, 2024, and their whereabouts were unknown. She explained that these detentions sought to destabilize her private security arrangement, leaving her in a situation of lack of protection.

[1] https://www.oas.org/es/cidh/decisiones/pdf/2019/22-19mc125-19-ve.pdf

[2] https://www.oas.org/es/cidh/decisiones/mc/2023/res_79-23_mc_125-19_ve_es.pdf

---

Decision Overview

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) issued the Resolution on Follow-up and Modification in the matter of María Corina Machado Parisca, unanimously adopted on November 25, 2024. The main question before the IACHR was to determine whether, in light of Article 25 of its Rules of Procedure, there remained a prima facie situation of seriousness, urgency, and risk of irreparable harm that warranted maintaining and modifying the precautionary measures in favor of Ms. Machado, in particular to protect her life and integrity and to ensure that she could continue to engage in political participation activities without threats, harassment, or violence.

Ms. María Corina Machado argued that, due to her status as the principal opposition leader and her activities of denunciation and political mobilization, she faces a serious and growing risk to her life and personal integrity, materialized in acts of harassment, surveillance, attacks, and threats, as well as in actions aimed at neutralizing her capacity for political participation. In that context, she requested that the IACHR maintain and strengthen the precautionary measures to ensure her effective protection and allow her to continue exercising her political rights without violence or intimidation.

For its part, the IACHR noted that the State of Venezuela has not cooperated with the implementation of the precautionary measures. In this regard, it stated that the Commission “has not received a response from the State on the implementation of these precautionary measures. Nor has it received information proving that the State has been adopting measures during the time the measures have been in force. All deadlines granted to the State have since expired.” [para. 19]

The IACHR recalled that the precautionary measures mechanism is embedded within its function of supervising compliance with human rights obligations and is governed by Article 25 of its Rules of Procedure, which allows for their issuance when the situation is serious and urgent and when it is necessary to prevent irreparable harm.

As to the examination of the requirements, the Commission clarified that the alleged facts need not be fully proven and must be assessed under a prima facie standard. It also clarified that, in this proceeding, it is not for the Commission to rule on substantive violations of the American Convention, but solely to assess the requirements under Article 25 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure. Within the logic of follow-up and supervision, it recalled that it may maintain, modify, or lift precautionary measures depending on whether the elements of risk persist or new relevant circumstances arise.

As a starting point, the IACHR underscored the absence of official information from the State on the implementation of the measures, despite the requests made. It indicated that this lack of response prevented the evaluation of State efforts or progress and weakened the dialogue and coordination necessary for effective protection.

Citing its 2017 report “Democratic Institutions, the Rule of Law and Human Rights in Venezuela” the Commission situated Ms. Machado’s risk within the Venezuelan structural context it has been monitoring, highlighting “the weakness of democratic institutions and the progressive deterioration of the human rights situation”, the lack of the rule of law, the concentration of power, and the impairment of the separation of powers. [para. 27]

With respect to political dissent, it recalled previously documented patterns regarding opposition persons or those perceived as such, including harassment, persecution, removals and disqualifications, raids, and tolerance of acts of violence against members of the opposition, as well as stigmatizing statements by high-level authorities. In particular, the Commission highlighted “the existence of a pattern of serious human rights violations for those who publicly demonstrate or assume dissenting positions, particularly with the Executive Power.” [para. 28]

The IACHR also reiterated that it has identified “the persecution, accusations and harassment of opposition voices in Venezuela, as well as against people who express criticism of the government.” [para. 29]. It further stated that no administrative body may restrict political rights to vote and be elected through sanctions of disqualification or removal from office, highlighting the effect of these practices on the closing of civic space.

Regarding the post-electoral period of 2024, the IACHR recorded allegations of repression, arbitrary detentions, and short-term enforced disappearances, as well as patterns that generate a generalized climate of fear and intimidation. In particular, it warned that such practices generate a “climate of fear and intimidation among the Venezuelan population, which amount also to a denial of the right to political participation.” [para. 35] In that same context, the Commission found that, in Venezuela over the years, there has been “arbitrary detention of journalists and the criminalization of dissidence in the country, reporting around 1,500 registered detentions including activists, human rights defenders, opposition leaders, electoral witnesses, and journalists, as well as digital repression and the closure of news spaces.” [para. 36]

The IACHR recalled that the precautionary measures in force were intended “to protect the life and personal integrity of Ms. María Corina Machado Parisca, and to guarantee that she can continue to carry out her political participation activities without being subjected to threats, harassment, or acts of violence in the exercise of these activities.” [para. 40] The Commission considered that, after the July 2024 elections, the risk situation not only continued but even intensified, highlighting: (i) the temporal continuity of the risk events; (ii) the specific connection between those events and her political activities (including attacks directed at resources essential to her mobility and at her organizational structure); and (iii) the persistence of stigmatizing discourse from high-level authorities that would portray her as a criminal and legitimize attacks by third parties.

In turn, the IACHR attached special relevance to statements and accusations made by high-level authorities. The Commission held that official discourse in Venezuela would have sought to steer public debate against Ms. Machado as an opposition figure and to influence the conduct of the authorities responsible for investigating, producing an enabling effect for aggressors. In the words of the IACHR, “these messages are not harmless, but rather permeate the actions of third parties against Ms. Machado, who feel supported in their actions by the government authorities.” [para. 43]

Likewise, the Commission held that the aim of the Venezuelan State’s actions against Ms. Machado “is to remove her from the public debate in Venezuela, and to prevent her from continuing to participate, convene, and lead political activities from the opposition. Consequently, the Commission emphasizes its concern about the potentially intimidating effect that this situation may have on others within the opposition in Venezuela.” [para. 47]

The IACHR also observed a lack of effective State protection and the disruption of Ms. Machado’s private security detail through the detention of members of her team, as well as the absence of information on diligent investigations into the reported acts of violence. In addition, it assessed the risk of a possible deprivation of liberty under conditions consistent with documented post-electoral patterns: detentions without a known judicial order, lack of information about whereabouts, and obstacles to a defense of trust.

The IACHR concluded that “the situation of risk of Ms. Machado has been maintained over time, which is at a point of particular intensity, given the political leadership of the beneficiary from the opposition, in the exercise of her political rights. Therefore, a situation of seriousness, urgency, and the need to prevent irreparable harm persists, in light of Article 25 of the IACHR Rules of Procedure.” [para. 48]

For all these reasons, the IACHR decided to modify the scope of the measures in favor of Ms. Machado, requiring the State to: (i) adopt measures to protect her life and integrity; (ii) ensure that she can continue her political participation without threats, harassment, or violence, including formally informing her of the existence of investigations or proceedings against her and allowing access to the case file if one exists; and (iii) investigate with due diligence the threats and reported acts of violence, including possible responsibilities of State agents. In addition, it requested that Venezuela report within 30 days on the adoption of the measures and provide periodic implementation updates.

---