87. Regarding the case of Judge Maria Lourdes Afiuni mentioned in my previous report,35 the Government responded to the urgent appeal sent by several mandate holders on 28 July 2010.36 Judge Afiuni was the subject of two other joint communications, sent on 1 April and 26 July 2010.37 The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights mentioned the case of Ms. Afiuni in her statement at the tenth Biennial Conference of the International Association of Women Judges in Seoul and has subsequently engaged the Government on this particular case. 88. In September 2010, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention adopted its Opinion No. 20/2010,38 in which it stated that the detention of Judge Afiuni was arbitrary under the Working Group’s categories I, II and III. The Working Group specifically mentioned this case in its 2010 annual report.39 It reiterated its concern that the arrest and detention of Ms. Afiuni was an act of reprisal against her decision to release on bail Eligio Cedeño in the light of the recommendations made by the Working Group in its Opinion No. 10/2009, in which the Working Group ruled the detention of Mr. Cedeño as arbitrary. In its recommendations in 2010, the Working Group called for all States to cease the practice of reprisals. The Chairperson of the Working Group mentioned this case during his interactive dialogue with the Human Rights Council at its sixteenth session, and called on the Government of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) to release Ms. Afiuni immediately. The Government replied that the rights of Ms. Afiuni were guaranteed and regretted the partiality of the report of the Working Group. It claimed that the Opinion of the Working Group had not included the explanations communicated by the Government and that this was not a case of reprisal. 89. The above case was also mentioned during the interactive dialogues with the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions during the seventeenth session of the Human Rights Council. The Government of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) responded that it regretted “the biased treatment that the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judgesand lawyers has given from the beginning to the case of the former Judge Maria Luisa Afiuni Mora, who is standing trial on charges of corruption and for favouring the escape of a banker now a fugitive from justice”. According to the Government, “Ms. Afiuni disobeyed the sentence of the Supreme Court, which confirmed the judgement of the banker in detention and also incurred in a serious omission of the legal proceeding in order to facilitate the escape of the banker”. The Government is of the opinion that, in the addendum to her report, the Special Rapporteur “echoes her concern for what she considers increasing criticism or attacks against the independence of lawyers in Venezuela without substantiating this”. According to the Government, Ms. Afiuni mentions “sectors of the Latin American judiciary which point to an alleged “Afiuni effect” and refer to fear or even terror among judges without providing more details”. The Government of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) is of the opinion that “all these are mere speculations, which lack legal rigour and are the result of an intense media campaign of international powerful interests against the administration of justice in Venezuela”. In her response during the interactive dialogue, the Special Rapporteur reiterated her concern at the detention of Judge Afiuni and asked that she be freed. 90. The Government highlighted to the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions the serious contradictions regarding the reference to the case of Judge Afiuni and her conditions of detention. The Government also reported that Ms. Afiuni was currently under house arrest for the duration of the treatment of an illness reportedly unrelated to her detention.

68. In relation to the case of Judge María Lourdes Afiuni, mentioned in my two most recent reports on reprisals,17 information was received indicating that she remains in detention. Judge Afiuni was arrested on 10 December 2009 after she ordered the conditional release of an individual whose detention the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention considered arbitrary. President Hugo Chavez reportedly publicly demanded that she be sentenced to 30 years of imprisonment. In September 2010, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, in its opinion 20/2010, concluded that the detention of Judge Afiuni was arbitrary (A/HRC/16/44/Add.1, paras. 2417-2434). 69. On 13 December 2011, a judge granted the request of the Public Prosecutor to extend the penalty of house arrest against Judge Afiuni by two more years. Judge Afiuni has already spent two years in detention. Several special procedures expressed their deep concern at the decision in a press release on 27 December 2011.18 Reportedly, the lawyer who has acted for Judge Afiuni since 2009 was arrested and detained for eight days on 4 June 2012.

46. According to updated information on Judge María Lourdes Afiuni, whose case was mentioned in my three most recent relevant reports,37 she was subjected to assault, acts of intimidation and rape by a government agent, which resulted in pregnancy and a miscarriage while in detention.38 Her trial began in November 2012 after former President Hugo Chávez amended the Penal Code by means of an enabling law (ley habilitante) so that trials could be held in the absence of the accused. Judge Afiuni, in consultation with her legal counsel, had indicated that she would not enter the trial chamber to challenge violations of her right to due process. On 14 June 2013, a court in Caracas revoked her house arrest on health grounds after a request was received from the Attorney General. The terms of Judge Afiuni’s release require her to report to the court every 15 days, and forbid her to leave the country and speak to the media. The trial continues. 47. Judge Afiuni was arrested on 10 December 2009 after she ordered the conditional release of an individual whose detention the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention considered arbitrary. President Chavez reportedly publicly demanded that she be sentenced to 30 years of imprisonment. In September 2010, the Working Group, in its opinion No. 20/2010, concluded that the detention of Judge Afiuni was arbitrary.3948. On 14 February 2013, five United Nations special procedures mandate holders issued a public statement in which they urged the Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to free Judge Afiuni, and called for investigations into her most recent allegations.40 They noted that Judge Afiuni had been in detention for more than three years, despite the fact that article 230 of the Penal Code established that detention could not exceed the limit of the minimum sentence of the most serious crime of which the person was accused, which would be three years. No response from the Government had been received as at the end of the period under review.

46.Concern has been raised in my previous reports at the situation of Judge Maria Lourdes Afiuni.77 In its latest report, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention expressed concern at the continued detention under house arrest of Judge Afiuni, who was arrested in 2009 for ordering the conditional release of Eligio Cedeño, after the Working Group had declared his detention arbitrary in opinion No. 10/2009.78 The Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in his report on observations and communications transmitted to Governments and replies received, stated that no investigation into the reports of torture of Judge Afiuni had taken place, and reiterated that the Government must ensure the investigation and prosecution of the alleged perpetrators.79

7.The case of Judge Maria Lourdes Afiuni Mora has been raised in each of my previous reports since 2010(A/HRC/14/19, para.45-47, A/HRC/18/19, para. 87-90, A/HRC/21/28, para. 68-69, A/HRC/24/29, para. 46-48 and A/HRC/27/38, para. 46). The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in its latest report again expressed its concern over the continued detention under house arrest of Ms. Afiuni, which it considers as a measure of reprisal against her for ordering the conditional release of Mr. Eligio Cedeño after the WGAD in Opinion No. 10/2009 had considered his detention arbitrary(A/HRC/30/36, para. 38). The Working Groupreiterated its call on the Government of Venezuela to release Ms. Afiuni and to provide her with effective and adequate reparations(ibid.). In its concluding observations on the combined third and fourth periodic reports of Venezuela, CAT regretted that no investigation had so far been opened on the case of Judge Afiuni and stated that the Government should without delay conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into the allegations of torture and ill-treatment, including sexual assault, of Ms. Afiuni during her detention(CAT/C/VEN/CO/3-4, para. 16).

45.Reference has been made in each of my previous reports since 2010 to the case of Judge María Lourdes Afiuni Mora, who had become the subject of reprisalsin the form of arbitrary detentionwhen she ordered the conditional release of Eligio Cedeño, after the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention,in its opinion No. 10/2009,had considered his detention arbitrary(see A/HRC/14/19, paras. 45-47, A/HRC/18/19, paras. 87-90, A/HRC/21/18, paras. 68-69, A/HRC/24/29 and Corr.1, paras. 46-48, A/HRC/27/38, para.46, and A/HRC/30/29, annex, para. 7). In its concluding observations on the fourth periodic report of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Human Rights Committee expressed particular concern over her situation, including at claims that she was subjected to ill-treatment and sexual assault during her detention and that those claims were not promptly investigated (see CCPR/C/VEN/CO/4, para.15).The High Commissioner, in his statement of 12 November 2015at the special meeting of the Human Rights Council on the occasion of the visit of the President of the Bolivarian Republicof Venezuela,also referred to the case of Judge Afiuni and urged the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to comply with the recommendations of the international humanrights bodies.10The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, in its 2015annual report, also reiterated its concern over the continued detention under house arrest of Judge Afiuniand again called upon the Government to release her immediately and provide her with effective and adequate reparations (see A/HRC/33/50, para.22).

109. The case of judge Ms. Maria Lourdes Afiuni was included in multiple reports of the Secretary-General since 2010 (A/HRC/14/19, paras 45–47; A/HRC/27/38, para. 46; A/HRC/30/29, para. 7; A/HRC/33/19, para. 45). On 23 March 2019, the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers issued a statement 164 on the ruling of the court in Caracas sentencing Judge Afiuni to five years imprisonment for corruption, which he noted with grave concern was another act of reprisal against her. Ms. Afiuni had been arrested and imprisoned in 2009 for deciding on the conditional release of businessman Mr. Eligio Cedeño in accordance with a decision of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (No. 10/2009). While in detention, she was reportedly subject to ill-treatment that could amount to torture, and refused medical treatment. Ms. Afiuni was held in prison for 14 months. In 2011, she was granted house arrest for health reasons, and two years later released under the conditions of not leaving the country or using social media. On 5 July 2019 it was noted by the High Commissioner for Human Rights that Ms. Afiuni was provided a conditional release. 165 Her release was conditional based on one of the measures of her sentence and she is reportedly still at risk of being detained.

139. The case of judge Ms. Maria Lourdes Afiuni was included in the 2019 report of the Secretary-General (A/HRC/42/30, para. 82 and Annex II, para. 109), as well as in previous reports since 2010 (A/HRC/14/19, paras 45–47; A/HRC/27/38, para. 46; A/HRC/30/29, Annex para. 7; A/HRC/33/19, para. 45) for her arrest, imprisonment and ill- treatment following a decision passed in her capacity as judge on the basis of a Working Group on Arbitrary Detention opinion (No. 10/2009). On 5 July 2019, the High Commissioner for Human Rights noted that Ms. Afiuni was provided a conditional release. 93
140. In its July 2019 report to the Human Rights Council, the Working Group expressed concern at the March 2019 sentencing of Ms. Afuini, which it considers “a measure of reprisal.” It reiterated its call to the Government to “quash this sentence and provide her with effective and adequate reparations” (A/HRC/42/39, para. 27). According to information received by OHCHR, on 18 October 2019, Ms. Afiuni’s conviction for corruption and her five-year sentence was upheld by the Court of Appeal, and her case is pending before the Supreme Tribunal of Justice. She is not allowed to leave the country, communicate with the press or use social media.

142. The case of judge Ms. Lourdes Afiuni was included in the 2020 and 2019 reports of the Secretary-General,260 as well as in previous reports since 20102 on allegations of arbitrary detention and ill-treatment following a decision passed in her capacity as judge on the basis of a Working Group on Arbitrary Detention opinion (No. 10/2009). On 4 July 2019, Ms. Afiuni was granted a conditional release. On 25 January 2021, special procedures mandate holders addressed the alleged judicial harassment against Ms. Afiuni in relation to the exercise of her jurisdictional function as Judge of the 31st Control Court of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas.
143. On 8 November 2020, the Criminal Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court resolved to dismiss Ms. Afiuni’s appeal for being allegedly “manifestly unfounded” and confirmed her five-year imprisonment sentence. The Judge is yet to determine whether her sentence has been fully served. Mandate holders stated that Ms. Afiuni’s punishment represents an emblematic case that reportedly results in a generalized fear among the country’s judges to issue rulings contrary to the Government’s will and reiterated her targeting due to the UN Working Group opinion (VEN 11/2020). On 18 March 2021, the Government responded, providing details on the case, including about past and ongoing legal proceedings, stating that due process had been guaranteed throughout.262 On 26 August 2021, the Government responded to the note verbale sent in connection to the present report. Concerning the case of Ms. Lourdes Afiuni, the Government contended that the criminal proceedings against Ms. Afiuni cannot be considered as a case of reprisals for allegedly having applied an opinion of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. The Government stated that it has been amply demonstrated before the Working Group that at no time did the former judge Ms. Afiuni apply or invoke any decision of the special procedures of the Human Rights Council.

151. The case of judge Ms. Lourdes Afiuni was included in the 2019, 2020 and 2021 reports of the Secretary-General,194 as well as in previous reports since 2010,195 on allegations of arbitrary detention and ill-treatment following a decision passed in her capacity as judge on the basis of a Working Group on Arbitrary Detention opinion (No. 10/2009). Her detention was deemed arbitrary by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in September 2010. According to Special Procedures mandate holders, Ms. Afiuni’s punishment represents an emblematic case that has resulted in generalized fear among the country’s judges to issue rulings against the Government (VEN 11/2020). The Government responded with details about past and ongoing legal proceedings and stated that due process had been guaranteed throughout.196
152. On 16 September 2021, the International Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela stated that the arrest and prosecution of Judge Afiuni had resulted in a climate of fear amongst judges and prosecutors, and that many declined to speak to the Mission out of fear of reprisals.197 In November 2020, the Criminal Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court resolved to dismiss Ms. Afiuni’s appeal and confirmed her five-year imprisonment sentence issued on 21 March 2019. According to information received by OHCHR, on 17 March 2022, the Third Enforcement Court of Caracas denied Judge Afiuni’s request to leave the country to attend a medical appointment abroad. The court reportedly indicated that she had not taken the psychosocial examinations to opt for an alternative sentence. On 11 April 2022, Judge Afiuni submitted to the examinations and interviews before the Penitentiary Ministry, and she is awaiting the results. OHCHR is monitoring the case and in contact with relevant authorities.

137. The case of judge Ms. Lourdes Afiuni was included in the 2010, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 reports of the Secretary-General172 on allegations of arbitrary detention and ill-treatment following a judicial decision based on an Opinion of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention opinion (No. 10/2009).173 In September 2010, the Working Group considered her detention as arbitrary (No. 10/2010). 174 The Criminal Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court confirmed the March 2019 five-year imprisonment sentence. Ms. Afiuni’s was considered as an emblematic case resulting in generalized fear among judges to issue rulings against the Government175 or provide testimonies to United Nations investigative bodies.176 In March 2022, the Third Enforcement Court of Caracas denied Ms. Afiuni’s request to leave the country for medical treatment abroad. She had reportedly taken the necessary examinations with the Penitentiary Ministry and was awaiting the results. According to information received by OHCHR, as of 30 April 2023 Ms. Afiuni continues to wait for the outcome of the 2022 medical examinations to opt for an alternative sentence. Her exit ban and prohibition to speak to the media reportedly remain in place. OHCHR continues to monitor the case and is in close contact with relevant authorities.