US embassy cable - 05CARACAS671

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 CARACAS 000671 
 
SIPDIS 
 
NSC FOR CBARTON 
USCINCSO ALSO FOR POLAD 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/25/2014 
TAGS: PHUM, PREL, PGOV, KJUS, VE 
SUBJECT: CUBA-VENEZUELA MLAT: REPRESSIVE INTEGRATION? 
 
 
Classified By: POLITICAL COUNSELOR ABELARDO A. ARIAS FOR REASONS 1.4 (d 
) 
 
------- 
Summary 
------- 
 
1.  (C)  The Venezuela-Cuba Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty 
(MLAT) came into effect on December 22, 2004.  Beyond 
standard provisions, the Treaty allows cooperation in 
investigating political crimes and offenses which are 
considered illegal in only one of the two countries.  Some 
Venezuelan legal experts have criticized the Treaty as a 
threat to Venezuelan sovereignty, alleging it unduly extends 
the reach of Cuban authorities.  The President of the 
National Assembly's International Relations Commission, 
Movimiento Quinta Republica Deputy Saul Ortega, defended the 
treaty, asserting it is the same as ones Venezuela has with 
other countries, and that it will not allow Cuban officials 
to act on Venezuelan territory.  End Summary. 
 
------------------------------ 
Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty 
------------------------------ 
 
2.  (U)  The Venezuela-Cuba Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty 
(MLAT), signed by the two countries in 1999, came into effect 
on December 22, 2004, when it was approved by the Venezuelan 
National Assembly.  The treaty establishes the legal 
framework for cooperation between Cuban and Venezuelan 
authorities investigating criminal matters, and includes many 
standard MLAT provisions: gathering sworn statements; 
facilitating documents and physical evidence; localization 
and identification of persons; transfer of detained persons 
to the other country to present testimony or other motives 
(only with the consent of the detainee); execution of search 
warrants; freezing of assets; collecting fines, 
indemnizations, and seizures of property; and any other kind 
of assistance consistent with the laws of the two countries. 
The treaty states that either country can refuse cooperation 
with political or military cases, but allows the government 
to propose conditions under which it will cooperate in such 
cases. 
 
3.  (U)  In the MLAT, Venezuela has agreed to act in cases in 
which the crime in question is not a crime in Venezuela, a 
provision not included, for example, in Venezuela's MLAT 
treaties with Mexico or the U.S.  Venezuela also agreed to 
the transfer of detainees for undefined "other motives" 
besides giving testimony.  The treaty specifies that the 
transfer of detainees and other persons to either country to 
give testimony requires the consent of the person in 
question.  Additionally, the MLAT with Cuba designates as the 
Central Authority the Justice Ministry.  (Note: The Justice 
Ministry, as it existed when the MLAT was negotiated, no 
longer operates.  The Ministry of Interior and Justice 
inherited only a few marginal competencies of the Justice 
Ministry.) 
 
---------------------- 
Repressive Integration 
---------------------- 
 
4.  (U)  Constitutional lawyer Tulio Alvarez asserted 
publicly in January that the treaty violated Venezuelan 
sovereignty.  He highlighted the possibility that Cuban 
officials would be able to act directly in Venezuela, without 
judicial supervision, to investigate people and property for 
trials in Cuba.  He further argued that they would be able to 
investigate Venezuelans to charge them in Cuban courts. 
Jesus Quintero, professor of criminal law at the Catholic 
University Andres Bello, also noted that the Treaty would 
allow cooperation on political and military cases.  He argued 
that this would put the Venezuelan judicial system, which he 
described as "still democratic", at the service of a 
totalitarian justice system.  He warned that the MLAT would 
allow the Cuban government to persecute people in Venezuela 
and that Venezuelan citizens could be tried in Cuba for 
criticizing the Cuban regime. 
 
5.  (C)  Criminal law expert Alberto Arteaga called the MLAT 
"delicate" in an interview with El Universal on January 14. 
He criticized the provision for cooperation related to crimes 
which are not recognized in both countries.  He argued that 
the fundamental problem was that Venezuela has a democratic 
system based on due process and constitutional rights, while 
Cuban justice is based on political factors, and questioned 
what benefit the treaty gave to Venezuela.  Comparing the 
Venezuela-Cuba MLAT with the one signed with the U.S., former 
Supreme Court lawyer Maria Soledad Sarria noted the Cuban 
treaty makes written follow up to oral requests for 
assistance in emergencies, discretionary.  She also pointed 
out that the treaty allows cooperation to be confidential, 
which allegedly violates Venezuela's constitution. 
 
---------------------- 
Much Ado About Nothing 
---------------------- 
 
6.  (C)  Movimiento Quinta Republica (MVR) Deputy Saul 
Ortega, President of the National Assembly International 
Relations Commission, told poloff March 2 that the criticism 
of the treaty was unfounded.  He claimed that the treaty with 
Cuba was the same as ones signed with Mexico and Paraguay. 
Maria Faria, professional staffer for the committee, said she 
had read the treaty line by line to compare it with other 
treaties, and found no significant difference.  An 
examination of that document revealed that the 
Venezuela-Mexico MLAT: forbids cooperation on political 
crimes which are not also common crimes; forbids cooperation 
on any crime which is not illegal in both countries; does not 
include the provision for oral requests for assistance; does 
not include a provision for confidentiality; and does not 
contemplate the action of foreign authorities in each 
country, all of which are allowed under the Venezuela-Cuba 
MLAT.  Ortega disputed that the treaty would allow Cubans to 
act in Venezuela, and asserted that all requests for 
assistance would be carried out by Venezuelan police. 
 
------- 
Comment 
------- 
 
7.  (C)  There are serious problems with the Venezuelan-Cuban 
MLAT.  Venezuela has signed a more liberal treaty with the 
repressive Cuban government than the one it signed with us 
and Mexico.  The signing of a treaty with a dictatorship 
which promises cooperation in criminal investigations for 
actions which are not crimes in Venezuela, and the liberal 
treatment of political crimes open the door to investigations 
of Cuban dissidents in Venezuela.  Given the extraordinarily 
close ties between the two countries, we can only presume 
that Cuban officials investigating in Venezuela will have a 
broad mandate and extensive cooperation.  The treaty relies 
on the good faith and independence of Venezuela's police and 
judicial officials to prevent abuse by Cuban officials.  We 
have little faith in either. 
Brownfield