Caracas, Venezuela — In late August, Javier Tarazona, president of Venezuelan NGO Fundaredes, presented draft bills for amnesty and a reparations fund for political prisoners held under former President Nicolás Maduro’s government.
At a press conference on August 25 outside the Palace of Justice in downtown Caracas, the human rights advocate criticized the fact that many of those released from prison are victims who have not received reparations after years of political persecution.
Since the US captured Maduro in January, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said 1,046 political prisoners have been freed, while Foro Penal, an NGO that monitors political prisoners, said that there were still 328 political prisoners in the country as of August 31. Rights groups have called out the Venezuelan government’s harsh treatment of prisoners, including holding prisoners incomunicado, torture and forced disappearances.
Former detainees aren’t the only people who’ve been impacted by the political persecution under former President Maduro. Family members, too, have paid a high price with their loved ones behind bars, Tarazona explained.
In his statement, he noted that there are thousands of victims of Venezuela’s political persecution who are not receiving assistance, much less reparations, and he demanded justice for them.
“The creation of this national fund for the assistance and reparation of victims simply means no longer delaying care for human beings—putting people at the center,” he said.
The activist, who himself was imprisoned for four years and seven months at the notorious El Helicoide political prison in Caracas on charges of treason and terrorism, asked how much longer people must wait for justice and restored rights.
Tarazona noted that the organization is proposing a new general amnesty law because, according to figures compiled by organizations such as Foro Penal, there are still hundreds of political prisoners detained—despite promises of releases made by interim President Delcy Rodríguez, which claims that 1,046 Venezuelans have been freed.
Tarazona demanded full freedom rather than mere releases from prison, since many of the people who were granted measures to leave prison still face ongoing legal proceedings, including house arrest.
“We have been released from prison, but we do not have full freedom,” he clarified.
The Rodriguez government passed an amnesty law in February which was criticized by families of political prisoners as being exclusionary.
In April, that amnesty law came to an abrupt end, with Rodriguez saying at the time: “This amnesty law is coming to an end. For those cases that were not covered, or rather, were expressly excluded, there are other avenues through which they can be addressed.”
Read more: Venezuela’s amnesty law comes to an end, alarming families of political prisoners
In his statement, Tarazona criticized the government’s amnesty law, saying it didn’t truly solve the problems faced by political prisoners.
“This new proposal is a general amnesty law that guarantees the freedom of all political prisoners in this country. It is not enough for the issue to be raised—or not raised—at a negotiating table, because in Venezuela there must be reparations for the victims and a guarantee of non-repetition. That is why we propose creating a national fund for victim assistance and reparations,” he said.
Tarazona argued that authorities are avoiding the issue of political prisoners. “Denying their existence does not solve the problem. Those who made an executive decision to imprison us, to disrupt our lives, and to harm us psychologically, emotionally, and financially must make an executive decision to restore our rights.”
His statement came days after Jorge Arreaza, a deputy in the National Assembly, asserted in an interview with the Venevisión TV network that the issue of political prisoners had not been raised by the 2015 National Assembly delegation led by Dinorah Figuera.
“At the dialogue table, the issue of detainees—of people deprived of their liberty—was never discussed,” he said. He then stated that he does not know if it will be raised again. “It was not brought up at the table by the opposition delegation,” he added.
Since August, Washington has backed talks with the interim government and Venezuela’s opposition, including setting the groundwork for new elections. However, civil society groups have criticized the talks for ignoring issues such as pensions, healthcare and political prisoners.
Read more: Civil society pushes for broader agenda in Venezuela opposition talks
Arreaza explained that the justice system continues to review all cases of individuals who, he claims, violated the Constitution in order to prevent them from reoffending. “We cannot release someone only for them to go out and attack the State again. There must be an act of restraint, and while the national agreement involves this type of gesture and action, it also involves not repeating these kinds of mistakes.”
Ex-congressman and former political prisoner Williams Dávila also participated in the Palace of Justice rally.
According to the politician, President Rodríguez has an important obligation: she must authorize the High Commissioner for Human Rights to verify the lists of those released from prison. “She hasn’t even met with him, so this reconciliation process is a lie,” he said.
Furthermore, he called on opposition and government negotiators to prioritize political prisoners.
“They shouldn’t lump it [political prisoners] into a general category; the second round of negotiations begins on September 15, and the issue of political prisoners must be addressed then.”
Samantha Hernández, a 19-year-old woman who was imprisoned in connection with the Plaza Venezuela case — in which dozens of people were implicated and accused of attempting to detonate explosives at the iconic city landmark — feels that the issue cannot be set aside in the negotiations. “Follow through on what you’re saying,” she warned.
She recalled how detainees endure inhumane conditions, such as being forced to eat spoiled food, drink unsanitary water, and even suffer torture.
For this reason, she was insistent in her demand: “I call for the release of all political prisoners and of those who have been released from prison but remain subject to precautionary measures,” she concluded.
Featured image: Javier Tarazona, president of Venezuelan NGO Fundaredes, at a press conference outside Venezuela’s Palace of Justice on August 25.
Image credit: Julio Blanca for Latin America Reports
Facts Only
* Javier Tarazona presented draft bills for amnesty and a reparations fund for political prisoners in late August.
* Tarazona criticized the lack of reparations for victims released from prison after political persecution.
* US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated 1,046 political prisoners were freed since January.
* Foro Penal reported 328 political prisoners remained as of August 31.
* Rights groups have called out the government's treatment of prisoners, including incomunicado, torture, and forced disappearances.
* Tarazona noted family members also suffered losses due to political persecution.
* Tarazona demanded justice and assistance for thousands of victims.
* Tarazona proposed a national fund for victim assistance and reparations.
* Tarazona argued that individuals released from prison still face legal proceedings like house arrest.
* The Rodriguez government passed an amnesty law in February which was criticized by families as exclusionary.
* A deputy asserted the issue of detainees was not raised by the 2015 National Assembly delegation.
Executive Summary
Full Take
The narrative centers on the gap between state actions—such as releasing prisoners via amnesty—and the demands for substantive justice and restitution for victims of political detention. A critical pattern emerges in the systematic deflection of responsibility: an executive decision to imprison is juxtaposed against a procedural negotiation that seeks only temporary release, suggesting a deliberate avoidance of accountability. The insistence on creating a reparations fund shifts the focus from mere legal freedom (amnesty) to reparative justice, challenging the notion that releasing individuals solves the systemic harm inflicted. Furthermore, the tension between official pronouncements regarding releases and civil society monitoring of detention figures highlights an institutional disconnect where verifiable data is contested by official narratives. The demand for full freedom over conditional release, coupled with the focus on non-repetition, indicates a resistance to cyclical injustice; it seeks not just cessation of confinement but structural correction. This reflects a broader pattern in political transitions where transitional agreements are often treated as endpoints rather than starting points for addressing historical grievances and ensuring future human rights compliance.
BRIDGE QUESTIONS: If an amnesty is enacted without a corresponding reparations mechanism, what does this imply about the state's capacity to recognize past abuses? How can negotiations effectively prioritize systemic guarantees of non-repetition over transactional releases? What are the long-term consequences when official figures on political imprisonment are disputed by independent monitors?
Sentinel — Human
The text appears to be a journalistic synthesis based on reported events, exhibiting the characteristic structure and voice of human-authored political reporting.
