The law provides for freedom of speech and press; however, the combination of laws and regulations governing libel and media content, as well as legal harassment and physical intimidation of individuals and the media, resulted in practical limitations on these freedoms. National and international groups, such as Reporters without Borders, the Inter American Press Association, and the Committee to Protect Journalists, condemned government efforts throughout the year to restrict press freedom and create a climate of fear and self-censorship.

The NGO Press and Society Institute (IPYS) reported the government prevented access to official information in 69 instances, especially during the widespread protests between February and May, the months with the highest homicide rates in Caracas; it also prevented access to information related to the spread of the Chikungunya virus.

On September 24, the Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) released a statement expressing its “deepest concern” for the deterioration of freedom of expression in Venezuela. The IACHR cited President Maduro’s comments on September 18 accusing media outlets of “psychological terrorism” for reporting on a series of mysterious deaths that took place at a Maracay hospital.

Freedom of Speech: The law makes insulting the president punishable by six to 30 months in prison without bail, with lesser penalties for insulting lower-ranking officials. Comments exposing another person to public contempt or hatred are punishable by prison sentences of one to three-year and fines starting at Bs 55 ($8.75).

The government took reprisals against individuals who publicly expressed criticism of the president or government policy. On January 18, a Central University of Venezuela professor wrote an article critical of the government in the opposition-leaning newspaper Tal Cual. The president of the National Assembly, Diosdado Cabello, brought a criminal complaint against Tal Cual and Professor Genatios, arguing the opinion piece amounted to defamation. Judge Barbara Cesar Siero imposed a travel ban on Genatios and the directors of Tal Cual. IPYS criticized the move as an attempt to keep local press from criticizing the government.

Press Freedoms: The law provides that inaccurate reporting that disturbs the public peace is punishable by prison terms of two to five years. The requirement that media disseminate only “true” information was undefined and open to politically motivated interpretation.

The Law of Social Responsibility for Radio and Television and the Organic Law for Telecommunications prohibit all media from disseminating messages that incite or promote hate or intolerance for religious, political, gender-related, racial, or xenophobic reasons; incite, promote, or condone criminal acts; constitute war propaganda; foment anxiety in the population or affect public order; do not recognize legitimate government authorities; incite homicide; or incite or promote disobedience to the established legal order. Penalties range from fines to the revocation of licenses.

The law declares telecommunications a “public interest service,” thereby giving the state greater authority to regulate the content and structure of the radio, television, and audiovisual production sectors. The law provides that the government can suspend or revoke licenses when it judges such actions necessary in the interests of the nation, public order, or security. The telecommunications law empowers the government to impose heavy fines and cancel broadcasts for violations of its norms, and the National Telecommunications Commission (CONATEL) oversees the law’s application.

The government’s economic policies made it difficult for newspapers to access foreign currency, preventing many newspapers from purchasing critical supplies and equipment necessary for day-to-day business operations. Items that needed to be imported included ink, printing plates, camera equipment, and especially newsprint. According to IPYS, between August 2013 and September 2014, six regional newspapers permanently closed due to the lack of paper, and four newspapers temporarily stopped circulation. Nearly every newspaper in the country reduced pages and news content in an attempt to conserve paper.

During the February and May protests, local NGOs complained of 37 arbitrary detentions of journalists, 67 assaults on journalists, 31 burglaries or thefts of property, and one journalist. During the first quarter of the year, the NGO Public Space reported 174 cases of violations of freedom of expression, an increase of 240 percent compared with the same period in 2013. The most common violations were aggression against journalists, threats, intimidation, and censorship. Public Space also reported that in February alone there were 85 cases of violations of the right to freedom of expression, an increase of 500 percent from the previous February.

State-owned media provided almost continuous progovernment programming. In addition private and public radio and television stations were required to transmit mandatory nationwide broadcasts throughout the year. According to the e-mail newsletter Citizen Monitor, between January and December 3, the government imposed 166 hours of mandatory showing of presidential “cadenas.” The minimum cost in lost revenue for mandatory broadcasts in the year, according to estimates comparing with equivalent television advertising time, was Bs 88,785,065 ($14.1 million). During the February protests, Maduro averaged 84 minutes per day of broadcast time. During the first six months of the year, he broadcasted an average of 61 minutes per day. The minimum cost of all broadcasts (mandatory and nonmandatory) was more than Bs 113 million ($18 million).

During the protests earlier in the year, the National Press Workers’ Union (SNTP) documented 46 cases of physical aggression against journalists. Dozens more were illegally detained, had their equipment stolen by government officials, or were subjected to illegal raids on their organizations’ headquarters or their residences by military intelligence.

The SNTP claimed Ultimas Noticias censored the articles its journalists wrote that were critical of the government.

On July 4, El Universal, a 105-year-old private newspaper, was reportedly sold to a small Spanish company, Epalisticia, for $22 million. Local NGOs criticized the secrecy surrounding the sale and the anonymity of the new owners. Reporters and editors accused the new president of the company, Jesus Abreu Anselmi, of censoring a story on a protest of steelworkers at the state-owned steel plant SIDOR. Media reports indicated 30 editorial contributors had been fired and 15 other contributors resigned in protest. On September 17, longtime political cartoonist Rayma Suprani was reportedly fired from El Universal for a cartoon that satirized equipment and medical shortages at hospitals.

In March, Globovision censured footage of violent attacks by armed individuals and GNB personnel on residents in Maracaibo neighborhoods, causing Globovision’s correspondents Madelyn Palmar, Doricer Alvarado, and Jesus Gonzalez to resign. Doricer Alvarado, former correspondent of Globovision in Lara, explained the new editors censored terms such as “protest” and “civil society” in favor of the blander terms “demonstration” and “collectivity.” On April 3, journalist Reimy Chavez stated Globovision regularly censored its journalists, correspondents, and writers.

The law requires practicing journalists to have journalism degrees and be members of the National College of Journalists, and it prescribes jail terms of three to six months for those practicing the profession illegally. These requirements are waived for foreigners and opinion columnists.

Violence and Harassment: Senior national and state government leaders continued to harass and intimidate privately owned and opposition-oriented television stations, media outlets, and journalists by using threats, property seizures, administrative and criminal investigations, and prosecutions. Government officials, including the president, used government-controlled media outlets to accuse private media owners, directors, and reporters of fomenting antigovernment destabilization campaigns and coup attempts.

On February 12, CONATEL ordered NTN24, an international news channel that provided live coverage of the student protests, off the air. At year’s end NTN24 remained available only via internet. On February 20, President Maduro revoked the credentials of reporters from CNN but restored them the next day after public outcry.

Censorship or Content Restrictions: An IPYS study released on October 6 indicated censorship is an “umbrella” that not only suppresses information and opinion but affects freedom of expression overall. In its 2014 report, IPYS stated legal proceedings, financial sanctions, and administrative actions against news outlets incurred lower political costs than shutting down news outlets directly. Members of the independent media privately said they regularly engaged in self-censorship due to fear of government reprisal. Public Space reported that between January and September 10, there were 107 cases involving censorship, 28 cases of harassment of the media through legal means, 85 cases of aggression against journalists, and 25 cases of administrative restrictions. Twenty-nine percent of the cases occurred in February during the height of the protests.

While the country’s major newspapers were independently owned, some print media tended to exercise caution to secure government advertising.

The government also exercised control over content through licensing and broadcasting requirements. CONATEL acted selectively on applications from private broadcasters for renewal of their broadcast frequencies. Public Space reported many station owners requested renewal of their broadcast licenses, but CONATEL did not respond in a timely manner and then punished the radio stations by sanctioning them or refusing to renew their licenses. According to Nelson Belfort, former president of the Venezuelan Radio Chamber, there were approximately 2,000 illegal radio stations in the country. According to local NGOs, CONATEL had not renewed licenses for most stations since 2007. CONATEL’s website showed 250 community radio stations registered. Local NGOs considered this a government tactic to encourage self-censorship by being able to close the radio station if it transmits antigovernment content.

Libel Laws/National Security: The government exercised control over the press through the government entity known as the Strategic Center for Security and Protection of the Homeland (CESPPA), established in 2013, which is similar to the government entity Center for National Situational Studies (CESNA), established in 2010. CESNA and CESPPA have similar mandates and are responsible for “compiling, processing, analyzing, and classifying” both government-released and other public information with the objective of “protecting the interests and objectives of the state.” The TSJ took no further action at year’s end on a complaint filed by NGOs in 2012 seeking the annulment of CESNA.

Nongovernmental Impact: Widespread violence in the country made it difficult to determine whether attacks on journalists resulted from common criminal activity or whether criminals or others targeted members of the media.

The law provides that all private and public sector workers (except armed forces members) have the right to form and join unions of their choice, and it provides for collective bargaining and the right to strike. The law, however, places several restrictions on these rights. Minimum membership requirements for unions differ based on the type of union. A minimum of 20 workers is required to form a company union; 40 workers in the same field to form a professional, industrial, or sectoral union in one jurisdiction; and 150 workers to form a regional or national union. Ten persons can form an employers’ association, a parallel type of representation endorsed and openly supported by the government.

The law prohibits “any act of discrimination or interference contrary to the exercise” of workers’ right to unionize. The law requires that all unions must provide the Ministry of Labor a full membership roster that includes the full name, home address, telephone number, and national identification number for each union member. The ministry reviews the registration and determines whether the union fulfilled all requirements. Unions must submit their registration by December 31 of the year the union forms; if not received by the ministry or if the ministry considers the registration unsatisfactory, the union will cease to exist. Organized labor activists reported the process was onerous and infringed on freedom of association.

Under the law employers may negotiate a collective contract only with the union that represents the majority of their workers. Minority organizations cannot jointly negotiate in cases where no union represents an absolute majority. The law also places a number of restrictions on unions’ ability to administer their activities. For example, the CNE has the authority to administer internal elections of labor unions, federations, and confederations. By law elections must be held at least every three years. If CNE-administered and -certified elections are not held within this period, the law prohibits union leaders from representing workers in negotiations or engaging in anything beyond administrative tasks. The law also requires the presence of labor inspectors to witness and legitimize unions’ decisions before the Ministry of Labor. According to the labor group Autonomous Front in Defense of Employment, Wages, and Unions (FADESS), the ministry did not send labor inspectors to opposition-leaning union meetings, thus rendering their decisions moot.

The law recognizes the right of all public and private sector workers to strike, subject to conditions established by law. By law workers participating in legal strikes receive immunity from prosecution, and their time-in-service may not be reduced by the time engaged in a strike. The law requires that striking workers be re-incorporated and provides for prison terms of six to 15 months for employers who fail to do so. Replacement workers are not permitted during legal strikes.

The law prohibits striking workers from paralyzing the production or provision of essential public goods and services, but it defines “essential services” more broadly than international standards. The International Labor Organization (ILO) called on the government to amend the law to exclude from the definition of “essential services” activities “that are not essential in the strict sense of the term … [and] so that in no event may criminal sanctions be imposed in cases of peaceful strikes.”

The minister of labor and social security may order public or private sector strikers back to work and submit their disputes to arbitration if the strike “puts in immediate danger the lives or security of all or part of the population.” Other laws establish criminal penalties for the exercise of the right to strike in certain circumstances. For example, the law prohibits and punishes with a five- to 10-year prison sentence anyone who “organizes, supports, or instigates the realization of activities within security zones that are intended to disturb or affect the organization and functioning of military installations, public services, industries and basic [mining] enterprises, or the social-economic life of the country.” In addition the law provides for prison terms of two to six years and six to 10 years, respectively, for those who restrict the distribution of goods and for “those … who develop or carry out actions or omissions that impede, either directly or indirectly, the production, manufacture, import, storing, transport, distribution, and commercialization of goods.” Labor activists were charged under these provisions as well as under provisions for “instigation to commit a crime,” “blocking public access,” and restriction of the “right to work.”

The government placed restrictions on the freedom of association and right to collective bargaining through administrative and legal mechanisms. Labor unions in both the private and public sectors noted long delays in obtaining CNE concurrence to hold elections and in receiving certification of the election results, which hindered unions’ ability to bargain collectively because union leaders were not permitted to represent workers in negotiations. The ILO reported it repeatedly found cases of interference in trade union elections by the CNE.

According to PROVEA, “large sectors of national, state, and municipal public administrations and an important number of state enterprises continued to refuse to discuss collective agreements.” According to FADESS, there were more than 300 expired public sector union contracts nationwide. The government had not yet responded to the ILO request for information about reports the majority of collective bargaining agreements in the public sector had expired (some for more than three years) but were being applied without being legally valid, with the right to collective bargaining denied due to invocation by authorities of “overdue elections” (not convoking or concluding the electoral process). For example, the state-run electric company Corpoelec had not taken steps to renew or redraft the collective bargaining agreement that expired in 2011. As of May 1, 82 of the 89 collective bargaining agreements approved were in the private sector. A 2013 Labor Ministry report stated that 91 percent of the 448 collective bargaining agreements made were in the private sector.

The government continued to support many “parallel” unions, which sought to dilute the membership and effectiveness of traditional independent unions. In general these government-supported unions were not subject to the same government scrutiny and requirements regarding leadership elections.

The OVCS reported that during the first six months of the year, there were 647 labor rights-related protests related to increased pay and benefits, the need for collective bargaining agreements, and declining workplace conditions. According to media reports, the government blacklisted and punished union leaders and workers for peaceful protests demanding wage increases and better conditions at work. For instance, a leader of the Electric Workers Single Union of Bolivar State (SUTEEB) reported government officials used media coverage of protests to identify participants in order to fire or harass them into ceasing their demonstrations. Similarly, a leader from the Electric Workers Federation (FETRAELEC) reported government officials telephoned several union members to demand suspension of the protests.

Workers at the state-owned steel plant SIDOR, in Bolivar state, protested delays in the negotiation of a new contract. On July 23, President of the National Assembly Diosdado Cabello went to Bolivar state and during a press conference stated the members of the Iron and Steel Workers Single Union (SUTISS) were mobsters, immoral, and unpatriotic for their public protests. According to FADESS, on July 28, 10,000 workers from SIDOR marched in Puerto Ordaz to demand a new collective workers’ contract. According to media sources, on the morning of August 11, GNB officials violently suppressed a workers assembly at SIDOR and arrested 14 persons. Two workers, William Castillo and Johan Perez, were seriously injured by rubber pellets.

On April 23, a Caracas court absolved union leader Ruben Gonzalez of “incitement to commit crimes” for his role in organizing a 2009 strike at Ferrominera Orinoco. The strike was called to protest the company’s alleged failure to pay overdue wages and comply with other elements of the collective agreement. The government conditionally released Gonzalez in 2011, after 17 months in detention at the Caroni municipality police headquarters, following protests by labor activists and students.

The government continued to refuse to adjudicate or otherwise resolve the cases of 19,000 employees of the state oil company Venezuelan Petroleum (PDVSA) who were fired during and after the 2002-03 strike. The Ministry of Labor continued to deny registration to UNAPETROL, a union composed of these workers. In November 2013 UNAPETROL submitted an injunction to the IACHR for the protection of those workers’ rights.

Union leaders were subject to violent attacks. The lack of effective investigations made determining the motive for the killings difficult. According to OVCS and PROVEA, the government did not investigate most violent crimes between and against union workers, and few were solved. PROVEA reported that less than 5 percent of the cases had been investigated. The ILO requested the government establish a national tripartite committee on situations of violence and provide information on the findings of the investigations carried out by the national prosecutor appointed to investigate all cases of violence against trade union leaders and members.