Security in a Shrinking Civic Space: Utilising the collective voice of Venezuelan civil society

We spoke to a Venezuelan human rights organisation about the risks they're currently facing and how they foster a collective approach in their response to these risks.

Following GISF’s Global Security Conference last month, we spoke to a representative from the Venezuelan human rights organisation Center for Human Rights Defenders and Justice. They joined us at the Conference to share their experience and perspectives in a context where access, operational space, and trust with authorities have eroded.

In conversation with Ariel Voss, GISF Communications Officer

Could you tell us a bit about your organisation and the context that you work in?

The history of the Center for Human Rights Defenders and Justice (Centro para los Defensores y la Justicia – CDJ) began in 2017 when I decided, with some other colleagues, to establish an NGO that responds to the criminalisation and repression of civil society actors, human rights defenders (HRDs), and those working in peace building and humanitarian organisations.

After 2013, repression and attacks on civil society actors increased significantly. In Venezuela, there wasn’t an NGO that focused mainly on the protection of civil society actors. Some NGOs did some work related to specific cases, but none had a broader focus on the security and protection of civil society actors. We decided to establish CDJ to fill this gap, alongside promoting and defending human rights. We were responding directly to the needs of those working to strengthen civic space and democratic institutions.

We bring tools to HRDs and humanitarian actors to help them work safely in insecure environments. We take a holistic approach to their protection, and work to strengthen their own capacities. This includes personal security, risk assessments, creating security protocols, and the psychosocial components of security.

We also focus on the research, monitoring, and documentation of the state of civic space in Venezuela. We publish monthly reports on HRDs and humanitarian actors, which both report figures and provide analysis of the data. The analysis includes the evolution in patterns of stigmatisation, criminalisation, harassment, intimidation, and digital attacks, and how this affects the work of HRDs.

We use these reports to support our advocacy efforts, presenting cases before international mechanisms such as the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights Defenders and the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights.

What are the main risks that you’re navigating at the moment as an organisation?

I think the reality is that we have to work in a really complex environment. The criminalisation situation of human rights defenders, civil society actors, and other NGOs has had massive consequences. We face the risks of intimidation, harassment, and risks linked to operating in a restrictive legal framework. The state continuously tries to neutralise and control the activities of NGOs.

“We face the risks of intimidation, harassment, and risks linked to operating in a restrictive legal framework. The state continuously tries to neutralise and control the activities of NGOs.”

Following the election process in Venezuela in 2024, the risks increased significantly. We decided to keep a low profile and stopped doing public activities so that we could continue our work. A lot of colleagues decided to close their NGOs, leave the country, or move their work outside the country to preserve their security. We have been able to continue operating wholly inside Venezuela, and can continue to protect others.

After the increase in restrictions in 2024, we noticed an increase in fear and distrust between NGOs. People became more hesitant to meet in person, and communication became more careful because you never know which conversations might be infiltrated.

Authoritarian regimes (not just in Venezuela) that implement anti-NGO laws, utilise anti-terrorism laws to control NGOs, or restrict the freedoms needed for these organisations to operate, do so to break the confidence of civil society actors. These state policies disrupt not only the trust between CSOs, but also between these organisations and the populations receiving the support.

One of your latest reports mentions that while numbers of incidents have gone down, this isn’t because of an improved situation, it’s due to an increase in self-censorship due to the legal consequences of speaking out.

I’m glad you’ve been able to read the report! It’s interesting that the international community believe that, with the political changes in Venezuela, things are better for civil society here, but it’s not that way. It’s true that quantitatively, the number of attacks are falling, but this reflects increased caution and self-censorship rather than a reduction in risk. At any moment, the state can activate the repressive system that is still functional.

“It’s true that quantitatively, the number of attacks are falling, but this reflects increased caution and self-censorship rather than a reduction in risk.”

What are some of the bigger challenges that you’re facing when it comes to implementation of security strategies?

At the moment, it can feel like staff react after the materialisation of the risk. We are trying to build a stronger security culture, where we think of security in a preventative way. It’s true that sometimes things are completely outside of our control, but the way that we prepare to face those risks is very important. We are trying to develop a proactive, preventive approach to security within our organisation.

For our organisation in particular, the team is very young, and managing the fear brought about by the criminalisation situation can be a challenge. We have to address these fears internally before we can promote security confidence outside our team.

Alongside our training, we have expertise on the context and how it is evolving. This expertise means that we can adapt our tools based on up-to-date contextual information, and the reality that people are facing in the moment. This includes not just the repressive environment, but also the social and economic situation. We also try to highlight the reasons behind why security is so important, and ask colleagues to reflect on why it is important for us to carry out our work safely. If we cannot work safely, we cannot help others. We try to foster an attitude of collective security, not just from an individual perspective.

“If we cannot work safely, we cannot help others. We try to foster an attitude of collective security, not just from an individual perspective.”

Do you have any examples of when working in a partnership has been successful, especially related to security?

In Venezuela, we have a very cohesive civil society. In similar contexts, I understand that civil society actors prefer to work alone to preserve their security. I feel that in Venezuela, we have a strong collective voice, that we use to condemn attacks and demand the respect of civic space.

In January last year, one of the most recognised and prominent human rights defenders, the executive director of an NGO called Espacio Público, was detained in the context of post-electoral repression. A lot of NGOs and HRDs here in Venezuela responded in one collective voice to demand his release. After a few days, he was released from prison alongside other detained HRDs. Even if we don’t work on the same issues, or we have different approaches on how to address things, the collective action by CSOs in Venezuela was a really effective response to this threat to our community.

“Even if we don’t work on the same issues, or we have different approaches on how to address things, the collective action by CSOs in Venezuela was a really effective response to this threat to our community.”

In Venezuela, how do you see risk being shared between international and national actors?

I think that one thing that characterises civil society here is that we constantly work with international mechanisms of protection. However, when the criminalisation laws became harsher, it felt like the situation in Venezuela was not very important to the international community. We don’t have the large numbers of HRDs or humanitarians detained or killed, when compared to other contexts.

We try our best with our advocacy efforts to get the international community to understand that while we experience fewer of the more extreme cases, the effects that the repressive laws have are still important. The fear created within CSOs by the criminalisation of their work makes it difficult or impossible to carry out legitimate activities that are protected by international law.

“The fear created within CSOs by the criminalisation of their work makes it difficult or impossible to carry out legitimate activities that are protected by international law.”

Right now, we have international support through a fact-finding mission created by the UN Human Rights Council, through a mechanism following the Inter-American Commission, and through an International Labour Organization Commission of Inquiry.

Do you think that the international community understands the risks that you face?

Some of the community, yes. At the moment, the situation is more complicated because there is this appearance of change here in Venezuela. The international community sometimes doesn’t see that even though there has been this political change, with a focus on stabilisation, the repressive system is still active. Our advocacy work tries to make sure that the government doesn’t instrumentalise this appearance of change to further supress the work of HRDs and other members of civil society in Venezuela.

We need to work together with the international community to achieve change on the human rights and humanitarian situation here. International actors need to understand the importance of creating mechanisms that protect HRDs and humanitarians.

Reflecting on your participation at the Conference in May, what are some of the key takeaways you came away with?

It was a very enriching exchange that left us with much to reflect on. The challenges of ensuring organisational sustainability, coupled with those currently facing the international protection system itself, mean that protection and security strategies must be re-thought. It is essential to consider effective coordination mechanisms to influence various sectors of the international community on the fundamental importance of guaranteeing and prioritising actions to support and promote the security of NGOs.

Personally, it was very important to bring the vision of protection from a human rights perspective to the humanitarian sphere, considering that to advance effective security mechanisms and policies we need to build strong institutions, promote robust civic spaces, and reject the use of restrictive legislation that criminalises and seeks to neutralise civil society organisations. Working together for security is an important step we must continue to take, and we must demand effective structures to protect humanitarian workers, human rights defenders, and peacebuilders.

It is also essential to develop strategies for working together and to promote a deeper understanding among donors of the risks that attacks on and restrictions against NGO work pose to society and democracy. We must continue to foster international solidarity and build alliances and networks among organizations themselves to advance a more effective protection strategy.

This written profile was made possible by the support of the European Union.

Related: