Venezuela

State Party since	1 October 1999
Treaty implementing legislation	None
Last Article 7 report submitted on	16 May 2007
Use, production, transfer in 2006-2007	Use: continued benefit from mines at naval bases
Article 4 (stockpile destruction)	Deadline: 1 October 2003 Completed: 24 September 2003
Article 3 (mines retained)	Initially: 4,960 At end-2006: 4,960
Contamination	1,073 APMs in maintained minefields
Estimated area of contamination	6,438 m2
Article 5 (clearance of mined areas)	Deadline: 1 October 2009
Likelihood of meeting deadline	Low (plans to miss deadline)
Demining progress in 2006	None
Number of casualties in 2006	None
Key developments since May 2006	Venezuela stated that it is still making active use of its emplaced antipersonnel mines to protect naval bases; this would seemingly constitute a violation of the treaty’s prohibition on use. Venezuela’s 2007 Article 7 report gives this continued use as the reason for postponing clearance of its small number of antipersonnel mines beyond the Article 5 deadline.

Mine Ban Policy

The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 3 December 1997, ratified on 14 April 1999, and became a State Party on 1 October 1999. Venezuela has maintained that domestic legislation to implement the Mine Ban Treaty is not necessary because international treaties ratified by the government automatically become national law.^[1]

Venezuela submitted its fifth Article 7 transparency report, for the period April 2006-April 2007.^[2]

Venezuela participated in the Seventh Meeting of States Parties in September 2006 in Geneva where it made a statement on mine clearance. It also attended the intersessional Standing Committee meetings in May 2006 and April 2007. At the April meetings, Venezuela made a statement on mine clearance and also responded to the ICBL’s intervention on compliance concerns.

Venezuela has not engaged in the discussions that States Parties have had on matters of interpretation and implementation related to Articles 1, 2 and 3. Thus, it has not made known its views on the issues of joint military operations with states not party to the treaty, foreign stockpiling and transit of antipersonnel mines, antivehicle mines with sensitive fuzes or antihandling devices, and the permissible number of mines retained for training.

Venezuela is party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons and its Amended Protocol II on landmines. It participated in the Eighth Annual Conference of States Parties to the protocol in November 2006. It did not submit the annual report required by Article 13 of the protocol. Venezuela is not party to CCW Protocol V on explosive remnants of war.

Use

Venezuela has reported that it laid 1,074 antipersonnel mines around six naval bases between April 1995 and March 1997, one of which was subsequently accidentally detonated.^[3]

In 2007 Venezuela made highly disturbing statements indicating that it is still making active use of these emplaced antipersonnel mines. In a memorandum regarding its 2007 Article 7 report, Venezuela, in explaining why it may need an extension of its mine clearance deadline, stated that its border naval posts are under threat from Colombian guerrillas, making it necessary to acquire a detection and early alert system to substitute for the antipersonnel mines.^[4]

During the Standing Committee meetings in April 2007, Venezuela declared there had been no progress in clearance in part because it did not yet have a replacement for the antipersonnel mines guarding its naval bases.^[5]

The ICBL addressed Venezuela’s remarks as follows: “there was the intervention from Venezuela earlier this week stating that it has not yet started clearing the mined areas around its naval bases, even though its deadline is 1 October 2009, because it has not finalized its search for alternatives that would provide early warning and protection of its bases from Colombian guerrillas…. We do not understand why this did not draw a response from any State Party. Does this not constitute ‘use’ of antipersonnel mines? Venezuela has in essence said that it is purposefully deploying antipersonnel mines in order to derive military benefit from them, and is refusing, as required by the treaty, to clear them as soon as possible, or possibly even by the ten-year deadline. It can be easily argued that this may constitute two treaty violations: of the Article 1 prohibition on use and of the Article 5 clearance requirements.”^[6]

Venezuela made a short response to the ICBL intervention, simply stating that Venezuela is fully committed to the objectives and spirit of the Mine Ban Treaty.^[7]

Production, Transfer, Stockpiling and Destruction

Venezuela reported that it has not produced antipersonnel mines.^[8] It is not known to have exported antipersonnel mines. Venezuela previously obtained antipersonnel landmines manufactured by Belgium, Italy, Spain, the United States and the former Yugoslavia.^[9]

Venezuela completed destruction of its stockpile of 47,189 antipersonnel mines on 24 September 2003.^[10] It has never specified the types of antipersonnel mines that were destroyed.^[11]

Venezuela’s 2007 Article 7 report indicates it is retaining 4,960 PMA3 antipersonnel mines for training and development purposes, held by the Ministry of Defense.^[12] The number is unchanged from the previous two reports.^[13]

In its 2006 and 2007 Article 7 reports Venezuela did not use the expanded Form D for reporting on retained mines adopted by States Parties in 2005. Venezuela has not yet reported in any detail on the intended purposes and actual uses of its retained mines–a step agreed by States Parties at the First Review Conference in 2004.

Landmine Problem and Mine Action

Venezuela’s contamination is the result of mine emplacement by its armed forces at six naval bases along its border with Colombia; a total of 1,073 antipersonnel mines are reportedly emplaced in 13 mined areas which total 6,438 square meters.^[14]

There is no national mine action authority or mine action center in Venezuela. Rear Admiral Alcibíades Jesús Paz continued to coordinate mine clearance operations and training, a post to which he was first appointed in 2004.^[15]

Under Venezuela’s 2005 timetable for mine clearance the Guafitas naval base was to be cleared in February 2007, Puerto Paéz in April 2007, Atabapo in February 2008, Isla Vapor in April 2008, Río Arauca in February 2009 and Carabobo in April 2009.^[16] However, as of May 2007 no clearance operations had been initiated, according to Venezuela’s 2007 Article 7 report.^[17] Despite this, the Article 7 report states that the 2005 timetable will be followed, and that any delay will not exceed the deadline set by the Mine Ban Treaty.^[18]

The same Article 7 report directly contradicts this position by re-scheduling clearance of the naval bases, with the first operation (at Guafitas) delayed until February 2010, then Puerto Páez in April 2010, Atabapo in February 2011, Isla Vapor in April 2011, Río Arauca in February 2012 and Carabobo in April 2012.^[19] Venezuela added that this new timetable is compatible with a request to extend the treaty deadline; however, no such request had been made as of June 2007, let alone approved.

Venezuela also stated, as in previous Article 7 reports, that the mined areas had been checked and that training in demining had been conducted during the (different) reporting periods.^[20]

Summary of Efforts to Comply with Article 5

Under Article 5 of the Mine Ban Treaty, Venezuela must destroy all antipersonnel mines in mined areas under its jurisdiction or control as soon as possible but no later than 1 October 2009. At the Standing Committee meetings in April 2007 Venezuela stated there was no progress in clearance because it did not yet have a replacement for antipersonnel mines which it is continuing to use to guard the naval bases.^[21] As well as indicating that Venezuela is “using” (that is, deriving military benefit from) these mines in apparent contravention of Article 1 of the Mine Ban Treaty, Venuezela’s statement indicates that it has taken a conscious decision to miss the Article 5 deadline. The new, postponed clearance schedule is in effect a planned failure to meet the treaty deadline of 1 October 2009, in the expectation of gaining an extension.

In July 2007 Venezuela’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that an Article 5 extension request was being prepared, and that the UN had been informed.^[22]

Landmine/ERW Casualties and Survivor Assistance

No new mine/ERW casualties were recorded in 2006 and January-June 2007.^[23] The last known mine casualty was reported in 2004 and one other occurred in 1996; both were military.^[24] In 2007 the government revealed details about the 1996 mine incident which it had mentioned first in 2003. The incident occurred in 1996 at the naval post of Río Arauca Internacional in Apure State. The Government is no longer in contact with the survivor but claims he received medical and psychological support.^[25]

The second Venezuelan mine survivor continued to receive a pension, which was increased in April 2006. The court case against the military commander who ordered him to enter the minefield remains ongoing; the commander received a disciplinary sanction in the meantime.^[26] Venezuela did not provide information on survivor assistance activities in its Article 7 Report.

Venezuela has a national health system with specialized services located in main urban centers, including rehabilitation services.^[27] It has legislation prohibiting discrimination against people with disabilities, but implementation is problematic.^[28] As of 27 June 2007 Venezuela had not signed the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities or its Optional Protocol.

---