U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

97–464PDF 2015

DEPLORABLE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN

CUBA AND VENEZUELA

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

NOVEMBER 6, 2015

Serial No. 114–123

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

DARRELL E. ISSA, California 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

PAUL COOK, California 

RANDY K. WEBER SR., Texas 

SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

CURT CLAWSON, Florida 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

REID J. RIBBLE, Wisconsin 

DAVID A. TROTT, Michigan 

LEE M. ZELDIN, New York 

DANIEL DONOVAN, New York 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

GRACE MENG, New York 

LOIS FRANKEL, Florida 

TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania

AMY PORTER, Chief of Staff THOMAS SHEEHY, Staff Director

JASON STEINBAUM, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

MATT SALMON, Arizona 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

TED S. YOHO, Florida 

DANIEL DONOVAN, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Mr. Antonio Rodiles, Cuban Dissident ................................................................... 8

Ms. Sylvia Iriondo, President, Mothers and Women Against Repression 

(M.A.R. por Cuba) ................................................................................................ 15

The Reverend Mario Felix Lleonart Barroso, Pastor, Ebenezer Baptist Church 

in Villa Clara, Cuba ............................................................................................. 22

Ms. Adriana Lo ́pez Vermut, Sister of Leopoldo Lo ́pez ......................................... 45

Mr. Carlos Vecchio Demari, Lawyer, National Political Coordinator, Voluntad 

Popular .................................................................................................................. 53

Ms. Ibe ́yise Pacheco, Venezuelan Journalist and Writer ..................................... 55

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Mr. Antonio Rodiles: Prepared statement ............................................................. 11

Ms. Sylvia Iriondo: Prepared statement ................................................................ 18

The Reverend Mario Felix Lleonart Barroso: Prepared statement ..................... 25

Ms. Adriana Lo ́pez Vermut: Prepared statement ................................................. 48

Ms. Ibe ́yise Pacheco: Prepared statement ............................................................. 58

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 86

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 87

The Honorable Jeff Duncan, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of South Carolina, and chairman, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere: Material submitted for the record ......................................................... 88

Mr. Carlos Vecchio Demari: Prepared statement ................................................. 90

(1)

DEPLORABLE HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN 

CUBA AND VENEZUELA 

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2015

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE,

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS,

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in the 

Stephen P. Clark Government Center, 111 NW First Street, Miami, 

Florida, Hon. Jeff Duncan (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Good morning. We will go ahead and get started. 

Okay. We were unsure when Congressman Curbelo would make 

it in, but I am glad he made it. And we will go ahead and get started. 

Good morning, and welcome to this congressional field hearing 

here in Miami, Florida. I would like to thank everyone for attending today, and I appreciate the effort taken on behalf of all those 

involved to conduct this important hearing. And sincere thanks 

goes to the county commissioner chairman, and we appreciate his 

assistance. 

This is an official congressional hearing as opposed to a town hall 

meeting, and as such, we must abide by certain rules of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the U.S. House of Representatives. 

I kindly wish to remind our guests today that demonstrations 

from the audience, including applause or verbal outburst, as well 

as the use of signs or placards, are a violation of the Rules of the 

House of Representatives. Additionally, use of photography and 

cameras during the hearing is limited to accredited press only. 

Today, I am joined by Representative Alan Grayson, who will 

serve as the ranking Democrat member; Representative Ron 

DeSantis, who serves with me on the Committee on Foreign Affairs; and Representative Carlos Curbelo, who represents south 

Florida and is a strong Member and active in the House of Representatives. 

We meet today to consider the serious issues of ongoing human 

rights abuses in Cuba and Venezuela. Winston Churchill once stated, ‘‘Courage is rightly esteemed the first of human qualities because it is a quality which guarantees all others.’’ Our witnesses 

have exhibited great courage in their home countries, and they 

have shown bravery in choosing to testify and tell their personal 

stories publicly here today. 

2

Yet these witnesses are really a representation of so many others 

who could not be with us here today, the Ladies in White; the Patriotic Union of Cuba; bloggers who dare to speak the truth to 

power; human rights’ defenders unjustly victimized for their efforts 

to pursue justice; religious organizations who want to worship God 

freely and peaceably; political prisoners who seek to live in a democracy that stands for rule of law and judicial independence; and 

the unnamed ordinary citizens of Cuba and Venezuela who live in 

fear and who have been unjustly threatened, beaten, or jailed. 

We will begin this hearing with panel I to consider the state of 

human rights in Cuba, and once we have concluded our time of 

questions and answers, we will recess and reconvene panel II to examine the situation in Venezuela. 

My hope with this hearing is that the American public may better understand the gravity of events in these two countries and 

that the United States Government may have greater clarity on 

ways to more effectively promote freedom and human rights in 

Latin America. 

As chairman of House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, I have focused closely on 

the issues of human rights and freedom of expression in the Americas this year. Since the Obama administration’s December 2014 

announcement that changed our approach toward Cuba, our subcommittee has held two hearings on Cuba to examine the national 

security implications of this change and the lack of justice for almost 9,000 American claimants whose property was stolen in the 

wake of Cuban Revolution. 

In addition, our subcommittee has held two hearings on freedom 

of expression, specifically looking at the challenges to press freedoms and to religious liberties. I am deeply concerned about the 

trajectory of both Cuba and Venezuela on these matters. 

It is striking to me that although the Obama administration has 

taken great pains to change U.S. policy; delist Cuba from state 

sponsor of terrorism list; and prioritize meetings with the Cubans 

on environment, climate change, law enforcement, travel, trade, 

and commercial airline issues, the administration has made no real 

effort with the Cubans to prioritize human rights or property 

claims issues. They haven’t even scheduled one single meeting in 

all their bilateral discussions to raise these issues. 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security officials who met in Havana last month focused on trade and travel issues. U.S. State Department officials who met in Havana earlier this week prioritized 

economic engagement. This very week, the administration made 

clear that human rights in Cuba are not a priority. 

On Tuesday, the U.S. State Department official David Thorne 

stated, ‘‘As in other parts of the world, we are really trying to also 

say let’s find out how we can work together and not always say 

that human rights are the first thing that we have to fix before 

anything else.’’ So apparently, working together is the new highest 

value for the administration under President Obama rather than 

promoting U.S. interests and principles and achieving results. 

Reportedly, the administration is also planning further unilateral 

action to ease the U.S. embargo on Cuba. In my view, the administration’s efforts toward Cuba reflect yet another failure to follow 

3

U.S. law, which clearly requires evidence of a democratically elected government in Cuba, the release of all political prisoners, the allowance of human rights organizations into Cuban prisons, and 

independent judiciary and free speech and press in order to terminate the U.S. embargo in Cuba. 

Do we see evidence today in Cuba that these legal requirements 

are met? I don’t think so. Last year, there was an average of 741 

arbitrary detentions every month in Cuba. During the Pope’s visit 

2 months ago, the number rose to 882. Last month alone, the Havana-based Cuban Commission for Human Rights documented over 

1,000 short-term detentions by the Castro regime. Thus, for the 

first 10 months of this year, the Cuban Government has arrested 

and detained over 6,000 people with complete impunity. 

Unfortunately, Cubans’ human rights abuses do not stop at unlawful arrests and detainments. The Committee to Protect Journalists ranks Cuba among the top 10 most censored countries in the 

world with the regime holding an iron grip on the print and broadcast media. The average Cuban citizen who wants to simply rent 

a book from the public library must undergo registration processes. 

In addition, while Cuba’s Constitution recognizes freedom of conscience and religion, churches must register with the government. 

Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons are still not allowed to practice 

in the country, and the government has been seizing church properties, imprisoning pastors, employing brutal measures against 

churchgoers such as the Ladies in White. 

While the Cuban Government released El Sexto last month, 

Cuba continues to hold 60 political prisoners and prevent 11 individuals released on parole from leaving the country. Three activists 

arrested during the Pope’s visit—and I will try to pronounce these 

correctly—Zaqueo Baez Guerrero, Boris Reni, and Maria Josefa 

Acon Sardinas remained imprisoned. It is clear that the basic U.S. 

statutory requirements for terminating or adjusting the U.S. embargo have not been met, and the U.S. Congress has a constitutional responsibility to provide a check and balance on the administration’s action. 

Now, let’s turn our attention to Venezuela. In Venezuela, the climate for freedom and human rights is also ice-cold. Last year’s violence by Venezuelan state security forces against unarmed student 

protesters and bystanders was appalling. The harsh reaction by the 

Maduro regime against these protesters resulted in the deaths of 

more than 43 people, and almost 900 people were injured. The 

press reports of the severe beatings, live firing of ammunition and 

teargas into crowds and arrests, beatings, and torture of the student protesters were chilling. 

Between 2014 and this past September there have been more 

than 3,000 detentions for political reasons in Venezuela. The number of political prisoners in Venezuela has surpassed those in Cuba. 

Attacks and arrests in Venezuela have affected not only political 

distance. Reportedly, the government has been increasingly targeting human rights defenders and local human rights groups. The 

government has even detained people who were caught by the intelligence agencies giving food, water, or other types of assistance 

to the protesters. 

4

In addition, Venezuela has one of the worst media environments 

in the region. Freedom House ranked Venezuela 176th out of 199 

countries listing it as ‘‘not free’’ in its 2015 report. 

Similarly, government hostility to religion has led to complaints 

by Catholic bishops of expropriations, harassment, electronic surveillance, and phone-tapping. Priests have even been disbarred or 

debarred from hospitals and prisons as well. 

It is laughable that in July the Maduro government announced 

a 4-year human rights plan to promote a culture of human rights 

when stories of human rights atrocities continue unabated: Individuals such as Marco Coello, a student who was jailed and tortured 

for 5 months; Alejandro Marquez, who was beaten, tortured, and 

murdered last year; Marcelo Crovato, a human rights lawyer detained without arrest warrant, imprisoned for 10 months and now 

living under house arrest without trial; Leopoldo Lo ́pez, who, after 

a sham trial, was sentenced to almost 14 years in prison, all yet 

to receive any justice for the government’s actions against them. 

Recent statements by the leading prosecutor of Leopoldo Lo ́pez, his 

case, now calls the trial a farce based on false evidence. 

So in conclusion, I am deeply concerned about the human rights 

situation in Cuba and in Venezuela. In my view, we have seen no 

results from U.S.-Cuba policy shift or the many conversations that 

Thomas Shannon with the State Department has had with the 

Venezuelan Government. I believe the U.S. Congress can do more 

to hold the Obama administration accountable for their actions on 

these issues and more. And I believe the United States must do a 

better job communicating a clear message of support to the victims 

of human rights abuses in Cuba and Venezuela and to both regimes that such repression is utterly deplorable and it must end. 

With that, I will turn to the ranking member Mr. Grayson, who 

is on the Committee on Foreign Affairs and acting as ranking 

member today for the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere 

for any opening statement he would like to make. I look forward 

to learning more from our witnesses today. 

So I will turn to Mr. Grayson. 

Mr. GRAYSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our 

witnesses for joining us today. I had a prepared statement, but I 

am not going to give it to you because in some sense this is personal, and I want to talk about it personally to all of you. 

My grandparents, all four of them, fled from Eastern Europe because of violations of their human rights and for the human rights 

of Jews all over the area. 

We see this same kind of suffering now in various parts of the 

world, and it is our duty as human beings to fight it, to make sure 

that we stand with others who are being oppressed. That is our 

function as leaders and as individuals. 

I am pleased to represent central Florida and specifically Orlando in Congress. My district has more people who were born in 

other countries than people who were born in Florida. In fact, if 

you look around the State, the number of people in the State who 

were born in other countries approaches the number who were 

born here in Florida. 

That gives us a unique perspective, and it gives us a unique circumstance that is not met in other parts of the country, specifically 

5

this: When we talk about foreign affairs, we are not talking about 

necessarily foreign affairs, something removed from us, something 

foreign to us. Instead, we are talking about, in many cases, our 

mothers, our fathers, our sisters, our brothers. These are the people who are connected to us in intimate ways even though they 

happen to live in other countries. And many of them weren’t fortunate enough to be born in a place that is a free place. 

When I was growing up, there were countries all over Latin 

America that were not free. In fact, the only country 50 years ago 

when I was a boy that did not have a military government in Latin 

America was a country that didn’t have a military: Costa Rica. Virtually every other country south of the border had a military government in one form or another when I was a child. 

Now, we have seen a tremendous transformation all through 

Latin America since then. And today, so many people live in freedom. So many people can accomplish whatever it is that they can 

accomplish in life. And that is what this is really all about. Every 

one of us is a unique bundle of interests, skills, talents, and limitations. I see it in my five children for sure. 

And what we want above all is we want people to be able to 

reach their potential without being barred from that by discrimination, by hunger, by a lack of education, by poverty, and specifically 

by a lack of freedom. That is an entirely artificial barrier so easily 

removed. 

Now, in the case of Cuba, I think it is important to understand 

that the perpetrator of this lack of freedom is the Cuban Government. I think it is wrong in this context to take shots at President 

Obama for doing his best to try to break the logjam that has been 

the mark of human relations in Cuba, and relations between the 

United States and Cuba now for more than half a century. 

It is clear to everyone who is going to be objective about this that 

the previous policies between the United States and Cuba simply 

didn’t work. If the purpose was to bring freedom to Cuba over the 

course of the past half-century, those policies simply failed. And it 

is wrong to point the finger at President Obama for trying to come 

up with a solution to this festering problem. 

I went to Cuba a few years ago legally as part of a religious 

group, and what I saw was a country where the people simply 

didn’t have opportunity. I saw a remarkably hardworking group of 

people. I saw a country full of people who are remarkably creative. 

How else could you possibly keep half-century-old cars on the road 

except through remarkable creativity? And I saw a beautiful land 

with a great deal of natural resources. 

What I saw was a government that was essentially enslaving 

people, keeping them from achieving anything remotely resembling 

their potential. And I saw a government that was mired in early 

20th century logic and ideas and keeping its people from reaching 

their potential individually. That is sad. 

We need a way to change that. What we are doing now is trying 

a different policy, which might be referred to as constructive engagement. We have seen some fruit being borne from that—the release of 53 political prisoners—but obviously, it is not enough. 

I myself, a Democrat, I call on the administration to adopt a policy that is not all carrot and no stick but rather a policy of accountVerDate 0ct 09 2002 16:37 Dec 18, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_WH\110615\97464 SHIRL
6

ability, a policy with the right amount of carrot and the right 

amount of stick. And in the course of doing so, I think that we will 

continue to see progress made toward human rights, and in particular, progress made toward what I think of as the American 

ideal, which is to allow every single human being, whatever their 

nationality, wherever they are from, whatever they look like, whatever language they speak, regardless, reach their true potential in 

life. 

With regard to Venezuela, we are seeing a social experiment on 

its last legs. The social experiment was obviously based upon a 

high price for oil. With a low price for oil, that social experiment 

has now failed. And we are seeing a government desperately trying 

to cling to power by blaming its victims. 

One of the more remarkable elements of modern politics is that 

there are some people who seem to think there is some benefit that 

when you violate human rights, you blame the people whose rights 

are being violated and you try to make political hay out of that. 

Anybody who has looked at the polls recently understands that 

the Maduro government is heading for a terrible defeat. Earlier 

this year, they were down 2 to 1 in the polls. When they did things 

like what they did to imprison Leopoldo Lo ́pez, give him a 14-year 

sentence, blame him for the violence perpetrated against his supporters, their polls plunged even worse than they were before. Now, 

this government is looking at a 3 to 1 defeat in the polls. 

So I think it is fair to say that many of us expect that that terrible and unfair and unjust sentence, blaming the victim, will 

never actually be carried out in full. 

Democracy still seems to function fairly well in Venezuela. We do 

expect an election. I will certainly do my part to make sure, with 

the committee, with the Members of Congress to see to it that we 

have the election that can bring real change to Venezuela and the 

restoration of freedom in Venezuela. 

In the meantime, we have to ask what we can do as Members 

of Congress, as leaders, as leaders of a community that is very diverse, that includes Venezuelans, that includes Cubans, that includes people from everywhere all around the world. 

And the answer is, first, we can bear witness. That is what we 

are doing today. We are simply getting together and listening to 

people who have been victims and bearing witness. Amnesty International does that every day for people who are similarly situated, 

and it is a great boon because then people understand that when 

they are victims, they are not alone and that their situation is not 

ultimately desperate because we all stand together. 

In addition to that, in hearing this testimony today we also bring 

to bear the great power and authority both moral and in other reforms of the U.S. Government. We are here as representatives of 

the U.S. Government, we are here as policymakers for the U.S. 

Government, and we are here to learn about what we can do to improve human rights in these places—in Latin America, in these two 

countries, and otherwise—and bring the future forward, bring 

these countries into the 21st century, not mired in 19th or 20th 

century ideology, bring the future forward and reach a time when 

everybody, everybody in every nation can be all that he or she can 

be. 

7

I am Congressman Alan Grayson. Thank you. 

Mr. DUNCAN. I want to thank the gentleman from Florida, and 

now I will recognize the gentleman from middle Florida, Mr. 

DeSantis, for an opening statement he may have. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for 

bringing this important issue down to Florida where I know it has 

so much resonance. I am really looking forward to hearing from the 

witnesses so I will be very brief. 

The Obama administration’s policy toward Cuba has provided an 

economic lifeline to the Castro dictatorship, but has not fostered 

greater freedoms for the Cuban people. Indeed, political repression 

has increased since the move toward normalization with the dictatorship in Havana. We must have a policy that supports the aspirations of the Cuban people, not the needs of the Castro regime. 

[Speaking foreign language.] 

Mr. DESANTIS. I yield back. 

Mr. DUNCAN. I thank the gentleman and now recognize another 

gentleman from Florida, Mr. Curbelo, for any opening statement he 

may have. 

Mr. CURBELO. Mr. Chairman, first thing I want to do is welcome 

you to our community on behalf of my colleagues Ileana RosLehtinen and Mario Diaz-Balart, who could not be here. They send 

their best and they thank you for your commitment to freedom, to 

democracy, and to human rights. 

I also want to welcome two colleagues who are no strangers to 

south Florida, but welcome Congressman DeSantis and Congressman Grayson. I am also very familiar with your longstanding commitment to these very important issues. 

And we hold this hearing today in a most appropriate place. This 

is the home of so many victims of the Castro regime and of the 

Venezuelan regime. This is the place where hundreds of thousands 

if not more have sought freedom, have sought refuge, and this community has embraced all of them with open arms. This country has 

embraced all of them with open arms. And by the way, they have 

contributed a lot to this community and to this country. 

So today, it is my privilege to welcome you and to join you in exploring the situation in Cuba, the situation in Venezuela, and of 

course U.S. policy toward both of these countries. 

For many years, in the case of Cuba, our Government had a policy of solidarity with the victims of the regime. Many feel that has 

now changed. 

In Venezuela, we are also concerned as we see the administration meeting with people like Diosdado Cabello, someone who is responsible for numerous, numerous, countless human rights abuses 

in Venezuela. So this is very timely. 

And, Mr. Chairman, welcome, and thank you very much. 

Mr. DUNCAN. I want to thank the gentleman. 

Before I recognize the witness, I would like to enter into the 

record a letter from my colleague who serves as the chairman of 

the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee on the Foreign Relations 

Committee in the United States Senate. Senator Marco Rubio has 

provided a letter. 

And without objection, so ordered. 

8

Before I recognize you for your testimony, let me say thank you 

for your willingness to be here today. And I will let you know that 

each of you have 5 minutes. I am not sure if we have the lighting 

system working today, but you have 5 minutes for your oral statement. If you would try to stay in that length, it would be much appreciated. And then after you testify, the committee members will 

have 5 minutes to ask you questions, and we will advance. 

The biographies are in your notes provided, so I won’t go through 

the biographies, and we will just begin recognizing Mr. Antonio 

Rodiles. You are now recognized for 5 minutes, and thank you for 

being here. 

STATEMENT OF MR. ANTONIO RODILES, CUBAN DISSIDENT 

Mr. RODILES. Thank you——

Mr. DUNCAN. Oh, make sure the microphone is on. I don’t know 

if——

Mr. RODILES. Yes. 

Mr. DUNCAN. There are buttons there. Okay. 

Mr. RODILES. Yes? Yes, it is working. 

Well, first of all, thank you for the opportunity to appear before 

you today. I am sharing my particular perspective about Cuba and 

the role in the world. 

My name is Antonio Rodiles Gonzalez-Rodiles. I head Estado de 

SATS, a forum created in 2010 by a group of young artists, intellectuals, and professionals to encourage debate about social, cultural, 

and political issues in Cuba. I am also a co-coordinator of the forum 

for the rights and freedom which bring together several opposition 

groups. 

We have witnessed the emergence of a new international bloc of 

authoritarian and neo-totalitarian states working together closely 

to stem the tide of liberal democracy that swept the world in the 

past 200 years. From Europe to Middle East to Latin America, this 

bloc continues to grow. The military dictatorship in Havana, 

Putin’s Russia, the Iranian theocracy are essential parts of this alliance of the enemies of freedom. This bloc will adapt in order to 

survive even if that means pretending to be free marketers. 

Castro Cubans claim it is updating its model, only seeks economic survival by allowing the other members of this alliance certain market mechanisms to operate, but it preserves the repressive 

character and continue to subordinate fundamental rights and freedom to the interests of its military dictatorship. 

Cubans’ intervention in Venezuela has been most alarming. The 

Maduro government is a puppet regime run by the Cuban advisor. 

Likewise, Havana emissaries are present in key roles in Bolivia, 

Ecuador, and Nicaragua, to name just a few countries in the region. 

Their electoral process has been twisted. State actors and institutions are used to steadily dismantle democratic mechanisms and 

institutions, and paramilitary actors are used to repress with no 

legal consequence. 

Furthermore, the formation of regional organizations such as 

ALBA and CELAC are providing international credibility and pressuring democratic nations to accept these spurious democracies. 

9

Not surprisingly, these policies are contrary to the interests of the 

United States. 

There are many other signs of Cuban pervasive influence in the 

region. To name just a few, first, a significant increase on human 

trafficking of Cubans through Mexico and Central America is taking place in coordination with organized crime; second, there is evidence of connection between Cuba and Venezuela in the drug 

trade; and third, Cuba, long-tied to the Colombian FARC, leads the 

talk for that terrorist organization to gain impunity and attain 

power in Colombia. 

Furthermore, in south Florida, the abuse of the Cuban Adjustment Act has allowed criminal rings from Cuba to stage systematic 

insurance, credit card, and Medicare fraud and stealing billions of 

dollars. The level of sophistication of these illegal enterprises and 

the fact that hundreds of millions are traced back to Cuba suggests 

the involvement of the Cuban regime. The future of the region we 

can see will have much to do with a democratization or not of 

Cuba. 

Meanwhile, on the island the outlook is complex. A transition 

from totalitarianism to authoritarianism is occurring in the context 

of a very dire situation in a nation that is completely de-capitalized 

and impoverished facing growing social unrest and widespread corruption. 

Raul Castro’s children are by all accounts his presumed political 

heirs. The plan is to warranty continued authoritarian rule with 

the support of all regional allies and the international bloc. The 

hopes are no doubt pinned on President Obama’s support to sustain 

the planned succession of power to the next generation of Castros. 

The repressive machinery works full blast in order illegal subject 

to the police state. 

Our work is focused principally on seeking a democratic transition and establishment of the rule of law in the midst of a very 

challenging external and internal environment. On the island, we 

confront a regime that enjoys total impunity in abusing the population. Internationally, we face the decline of the democratic principles and commitments. 

The steps taken by President Obama are in the present context 

unwise and to date have proved very dangerous. After the policy 

shift, the Europeans have followed the U.S. lead in appeasing the 

dictatorship. This is granting legitimacy and additional resources 

to a criminal regime that has shown ample capacity to adapt at 

crucial moments. Importantly, allowing the consolidation of neoCastroism validates authoritarianism as an alternative to democracy in the region. 

The majority of Cuban civil society has expressed its disagreement with the lack of transparency and the unconditional character 

of the normalization process. We also reject the opinion and interests of vital players from the opposition both internal and in exile 

were ignored during the discussion leading to the President’s announcement last December. 

China and Vietnam clearly demonstrate the fallacy of the argument that attaining certain economic freedom brings about civil 

and political liberties. The economic transformation of both countries has been cited by the Obama administration to justify a 

10

change of policy toward Cuba. Notwithstanding even of those two 

authoritarian countries, foreign companies are allowed to freely recruit and directly pay their employees. 

The Castro regime, meanwhile, exerts absolute control over the 

labor market, retaining or confiscating around 90 percent of the 

hard currency earnings for all Cubans working in the foreign sectors. It then invests these profits in its repressive machine. This is 

modern-day slavery that will not lead to the empowerment of the 

Cuban workers. 

A change of direction is fundamental. Concrete demands must be 

made to the regime, and the process must involve the active participation of indispensable opposition leaders. This is also a crucial 

time to prioritize the respect of fundamental freedom for each nation in the region. 

The good news in this grim scenario is that every one of these 

neo-totalitarian or authoritarian states there are pro-democratic 

movements tenaciously struggling for freedom. Recently, the Forum 

for Rights and Freedom was created in Cuba. It has brought together an important assembly of leaders and groups within the island and in exile demanding a roadmap of seven points. Its logic 

is tied to the implementation of the Covenants on Human Rights 

of the United Nations. 

The forum, together with the vast majority of the Cuban resistance, subscribes to the 10-point Agreement for Democracy, which 

lays out a consensus of what the standards should be for a transformation to a democracy in Cuba. 

In Cuba, for the past 29 Sundays, the forum has carried out the 

Todos Marchamos—‘‘We All March’’—campaign of weekly demonstration led by the courageous Ladies in White, together with the 

organizations such as Resistance Front, Estado de SATS, 

UNPACU, and others, demanding the general amnesty for political 

prisoners and the end of political persecution in Cuba. 

The courage of these civil rights demonstrators have been met 

with the brutality of the Castro regime and its paramilitary groups. 

All sorts of violence and abuse, including beatings, are taking place 

as the regime tried to stop the movement that has spread throughout the island. 

Until the last December, the people of this great democracy could 

be counted on to stand with the oppressed people of Cuba. President after President, Democrat and Republicans, has stood with us 

in the demand for fundamental rights. The Congress fortunately 

still stands with the people of Cuba. That is essential for our struggle for freedom. We hope that we can continue to count on your 

support. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rodiles follows:]

11


97464a-1.eps
12


97464a-2.eps
13


97464a-3.eps
14


97464a-4.eps
15

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you, sir. 

And now, Ms. Iriondo is recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MS. SYLVIA IRIONDO, PRESIDENT, MOTHERS 

AND WOMEN AGAINST REPRESSION (M.A.R. POR CUBA) 

Ms. IRIONDO. Honorable Chairman Duncan and members of the 

subcommittee, good morning. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak before you about the ongoing systematic violations 

of human rights in Cuba. I will be summarizing my written statement. 

Political scientists today said that the dynastic communist dictatorship that rules Cuba has changed, although the truth is that the 

island remains a tightly controlled totalitarian state with a singleparty system where there is no rule of law, no separation of powers, the executive controls the legislature and the courts, where 

citizens are denied fundamental human rights and civil liberties, 

and where workers and labor rights do not exist. 

Into that undeniable reality entered President Obama when he 

began negotiating normalization of relations with dictator Raul 

Castro more than 2 years ago, a secret negotiation that brought 

about his new U.S.-Cuba policy announced on December 17 of last 

year. 

Almost a year later, the situation on the ground clearly shows 

that the Obama administration made many concessions not merited by the facts, such as returning to Cuba several Cuban spies 

that were serving time in American prisons, one of whom had been 

sentenced to two consecutive life terms, one for his role in the 

shoot-down by Cuban MiGs in international airspace of two civilian 

defenseless Brothers to the Rescue planes conducting a humanitarian search-and-rescue flight to save lives in the Straits of Florida, which resulted in the premeditated murders of three American 

citizens and one U.S. resident: Carlos Costa, Armando Alejandre, 

Jr., Mario de la Pena, and Pablo Morales, young men full of dreams 

that were left unfulfilled as the Castros perpetrated one of the 

most horrendous crimes in the long list of crimes committed by the 

regime throughout its 56 years in power with total impunity. 

Armando Alejandre, Jr., had voluntarily enlisted in the U.S. 

Army and served two terms of duty in Vietnam. 

The individual who ordered the shoot-down was none other than 

Cuba’s Minister of the Armed Forces at the time, General Raul 

Castro. I was on board the third and only plane that made it back 

to base on that fateful day of February 24, 1996. 

And pulling Cuba out of the list of governments that support 

international terrorism while several dozen fugitives wanted by the 

FBI are welcomed in the island. To this day, an American terrorist 

who killed a New Jersey State trooper in cold blood was sentenced 

to life in prison, escaped, and went to live in Cuba, remains among 

the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted. Regrettably, it seems that not all American lives have the same value. 

In regards to human rights in Cuba, the results are in. In April 

2015 President Obama and Raul Castro met at the Seventh Summit of the Americas in Panama. They shook hands and pronounced 

a joint statement the next day, while Cuban state security agents 

demonstrated the true criminal nature of the regime by conducting 

16

violent acts of harassment to undermine events of the summit to 

which Cuba’s and Venezuela’s independent civil society representatives had been invited to participate. 

I was part of the delegation of the Assembly of the Cuban Resistance in Panama, which was a victim of a brutal violent assault by 

a group of the regimes so-called diplomats and state security 

agents who stormed out of the Cuban Embassy located in the vicinity of the Parque Porras while our group placed a wreath at the 

statue of Cuban Apostle of Independence Jose Marti. One of the repressors was Alexis Frutos Weeden, a top-ranking intelligence 

agent for the Castro regime, who was subsequently identified as 

leading repressive activities in Venezuela. 

The attack, caught on film and reported by the news media, was 

of such violent nature that many of the activists needed emergency 

medical treatment. The pro-democracy delegation was detained by 

Panamanian police authorities for over 8 hours before being released, threatened with deportation and advised that they would 

have to go stand trial before a night judge, while Castro’s thugs enjoyed total impunity. 

Officials from the U.S. Embassy in Panama finally showed up at 

the detention center many hours later just as we were being released close to midnight. 

Two days after, we had the opportunity to meet with a House 

delegation which included this subcommittee’s chairman Jeff Duncan, who expressed his concern and made the following public 

statement at the time,

‘‘The unrelenting and merciless impression of the Cuban people 

by a regime hostile to liberty is a direct rejection of the values 

we as Americans hold sacred. No regime should be rewarded 

for such appalling acts. There is no cause dearer to Americans 

than the cause of freedom. The Cuban people have not forgotten the oppression they face daily, and we will not forget about 

them.’’

That a well-known agent of the intelligence apparatus of the 

Castro dictatorship, responsible for directing violent repression 

against young Venezuelan students, was there directly involved in 

the Parque Porras assault of our delegation does not bode well for 

human rights in our hemisphere. That this was allowed to happen 

in a free country within a summit that purports to uphold democratic values is simply unacceptable. 

Prior to and during Pope Francis’ recent visit to the island, the 

Castro regime unleashed a violent wave of repression with over 350 

detentions of peaceful activists. Three Cubans who attempted to 

hand a letter to Pope Francis denouncing the situation in the island were immediately arrested and have been kept incommunicado ever since. 

The Ladies in White are beaten by the police, and state security 

agents dressed as civilians and taken to prison. In spite of this, 

they have marched, together with other courageous leaders of the 

pro-democracy movement, for 28 consecutive Sundays as part of the 

Todos Marchamos, ‘‘We All March’’ campaign. This past Sunday 

alone, approximately 70 activists and Ladies in White were deVerDate 0ct 09 2002 16:37 Dec 18, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_WH\110615\97464 SHIRL
17

tained in Havana and around 80 in the Oriental region of the island. 

There has been a significant increase in repression and in the 

number of arbitrary political detentions, beatings, and abuse. More 

than 880 politically motivated detentions were registered for the 

month of September. October has been even worse, with 1,093 arbitrary detentions for political motives accounted for. 

Prominent members of the civic resistance movement in Cuba 

have died under highly suspicious extrajudicial and sudden circumstances, such as Laura Pollan Toledo and Oswaldo Paya 

Sardinas, to name a few of the most recent cases. 

In conclusion, the President’s Cuba policy has emboldened and 

enabled the regime, which continues to maintain its oppressive 

yoke upon the Cuban people, while misleading the international 

and business community with false expectations in order to generate the resources it desperately needs to stay in power. 

Nothing has changed in Cuba under Castro’s dictatorship that 

warrants unilateral concessions on the part of the United States. 

Human rights continue to be systematically violated. Fundamental 

freedoms continue to be denied. Thus, it is not U.S. policy that 

needs to change, but the Castro regime. 

In an interview this week in Havana, David Thorne, Special Advisor to the Secretary of State, talked about human rights in Cuba. 

The interview was carried by Reuters. Mr. Thorne said that the 

Obama administration will not condition improvements on the 

human rights situation in Cuba to American-Cuba policy, explaining that the administration is simply applying to Cuba the same 

policies applied elsewhere. Mr. Thorne also said that the pace of 

change, including human rights, is to be determined by the Cuban 

dictatorship and that the administration is satisfied with how 

things are going. 

It is my hope that Congress will continue to insist on human 

rights as an important part of American foreign policy. Until 

human rights and fundamental freedoms are restored, all political 

prisoners are unconditionally released, all laws against fundamental liberties are repealed, political parties are legalized and 

there are free multiparty elections in Cuba, the United States 

should stand united in solidarity with the aspirations of the Cuban 

people. Embracing a dictatorship in Cuba bodes ill for the aspirations for democracy and freedom of peoples throughout the Western 

Hemisphere and Cuba. 

As Chairman Duncan so aptly stated,

‘‘The unrelenting and merciless oppression of the Cuban people 

by a regime hostile to liberty is a direct rejection of the values 

we as Americans hold as sacred.’’

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Iriondo follows:]

18


97464b-1.eps
19


97464b-2.eps
20


97464b-3.eps
21


97464b-4.eps
22

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you so much. The video you referenced of 

the thugs in Panama attacking the protesters or the peaceful—not 

protesters but the memorial was powerful. Thanks for referencing 

that. 

Ms. IRIONDO. Thank you. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Yes, ma’am. 

The Chair will now recognize the next gentlemen, which is the 

reverend. And I can’t pronounce your full name, so help me with 

that. Lleonart Barroso? 

Rev. LLEONART BARROSO. Mario Felix Lleonart Barroso. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Okay. Gracias. 

Rev. LLEONART BARROSO. Sı ́. 

Mr. DUNCAN. You are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF THE REVEREND MARIO FELIX LLEONART 

BARROSO, PASTOR, EBENEZER BAPTIST CHURCH IN VILLA 

CLARA, CUBA 

[The following statement and answers were delivered through an 

interpreter.] 

Rev. LLEONART BARROSO. Thank you very much, Mr. Duncan. 

Good morning, Chairman Duncan, Mr. Grayson, Mr. DeSantis, Mr. 

Curbelo, other members of the subcommittee, especially Rebecca 

Ulrich. May God bless the United States. May God bless Cuba. I 

am a pastor, a Baptist pastor there. I have arrived from there yesterday to render this testimony here. Ever since the year 2000, I 

am applying myself full-time to the Christian ministry. 

Ever since the time when the socialists fall in the Europe of the 

East, and given its need for international support to continue in 

power, which constitutes the supreme objective of the Havana regime, this attempts to deceive the entire world, trying to make others believe that, in Cuba, they will no longer violate religious liberty and freedom like it was done before. I come here to affirm that 

some of these violations have evolved, just that, they have become 

more subtle, some of them. Others continue to be tacky, as always. 

In the particular case of the religious freedom, I perfectly know 

that authoritarianism cannot go against itself. Even though they 

have numerous licenses given to the state by the United States, 

given the exchange of religious materials in the island, the internal 

blockage imposed by the national authorities impedes any of the 

benefits. 

Since the closest case is the one that I myself live in my own 

flesh and about which I can really talk with all authority, I will 

now refer to specific cases concerning my church, my family, and 

cousins. Some of them have been reiterated during the last weeks. 

I have been denied any movement to nearby locations to serve 

as a pastor. For instance, in the city of Bejucal, a few kilometers 

from the city of Havana, this way my pastorship activity has been 

restricted to several rural communities where besides being 

stopped my minister is counteract. I and my wife have been denied 

the registration for a doctor’s degree in a theological school in 

Cuba. On several occasions I have been detained and moved to police facilities on several occasions against the law. 

23

In other situations I also have faced domestic arrest against my 

will. That is also against the law. During the recent Papal visit, 

hundreds of people suffered the same condition, the same situation. 

In this room here sits Mr. Leonardo Rodriguez Alonso. He traveled along with me yesterday from Cuba. He is a member of a Masonic lodge in the island. And he also has abundant material that 

deals with how the fraternal organizations suffer in the island. Mr. 

Leonardo, he was able to tape, to record, to videotape his detention 

by the police forces to prevent him from attending the Papal 

masses in Cuba. 

Many members of my church have been subjects of threatening 

warnings and mistreatment. Also, the case has been with people 

that live in my community so that they cannot attend church. 

Ever since January 2013, when some of us were able to travel 

away from Cuba, I have been detained at the airport itself when 

I returned to be interrogated upon my return. Every time that I 

have returned to the island from a trip, my luggage has always 

been inspected as if I was a traffic lord or a narco trafficker. But 

the merchandise seized has not been drugs but literature on many 

occasions of a religious nature, and even versions of the Universal 

Declaration of Human Rights. 

The most recent of these situations was just 2 weeks ago, Saturday, October 24, wherein 64 versions or copies were confiscated 

that I wanted to share with members of my church, and those are 

of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

Periodically, meetings take place, which are called upon by leaders of the Communist Party in Cuba to move their colleagues to reinforce, to double-up their forces. 

The ceiling where Baptist church is located that had just collapsed and needs to be repaired, but they did not issue the necessary permit. And as the way of blackmailing my church, they 

have mentioned orally that while I continue to be the pastor, they 

will not issue it. 

The education of the children in Cuba is in the hands of the state 

monopoly. It imposes a strong doctrine and is manipulated to distribute political material. On many occasions that is violent in nature and the icon is Che Guevara. This has traumatic effects on my 

two daughters, Rocio and Rachel, especially on the youngest one 

Rachel who is 7 years old in her second grade at school. Practically 

every night of September and October she has cried thinking that 

the following day she has to return to school where she does not 

feel comfortable, especially because she there is taught principles 

which are contrary to the ones that we teach them in Sunday 

school. 

On occasions, the boycotts have been attempted to be boycotted 

as far as our religious services through the use of gangs manipulated by the authorities. 

Last night, upon arrival from Cuba, I have posted a video on 

YouTube of acts of this nature perpetrated just 11⁄2 weeks ago on 

Sunday, October 25. 

Property which are mine or of my wife’s have been confiscated 

by the police force in the case of our personal laptops, but the worst 

part is not the confiscation, but the grade, the degree of being defenseless in which we have fallen having to appear at the judicial 

24

stages, supposedly in existence to defend us but from which we 

haven’t even had a reply, violating their own rules. 

The leaders of the western Cuban Baptist churches, the ones 

that are the churches that I lead or affiliated with—the leaders of 

the Baptist convention to which my church is affiliated continuously receives pressure from the office of the Communist Party. 

My personal correspondence is violated. My mobile service is totally manipulated. 

But setting aside my particular case, because I just pointed out 

that I am just a little example, even which is worse, at a legally 

recognized church and registered ever since 1939 in Cuba, if this 

happens to me, that allegedly had legal representation in Cuba, 

what can we say about hundreds of groups that are in existence 

for many years in the island and they are not even recognized legally? 

I want to point out more in particular one of the apostolic groups 

and the Baptist mission Berean, and their leaders and members 

are continuously oppressed. 

With the help of Christian solidarity, ever since September 2013 

we have set up 30 questions that in general question the freedom 

of religion within the island. I will try to mention the 30 questions 

briefly. 

Why do they keep the Office for Attention to Religious Affairs of 

the Central Committee? And if it is not its competence to define 

whether who should believe or if it is proper to believe or not? 

Why don’t they return the majority of the property confiscated 

during the years of open persecution or they indentify the affected 

religious groups? 

Why do they threaten with confiscation of property, especially of 

the non-recognized or formed religious groups? 

Why they have not asked forgiveness for the imprisonments for 

those interned in the concentration camps known as UMAPs, or 

even they have been murdered for holding different ideologies? 

Why hasn’t anyone been held accountable for the wave of repression which took place during the visit of Pope Benedict XVI that 

took place in 2012 and whereby many thousands of people were oppressed and threatened? And the same thing occurred recently 

with the visit of Pope Francis. 

Why do they continue to deny access to the mass media to the 

religious organizations? 

It is 30 questions. It is up on the web. I just wanted to point out. 

You can look for them. Within the 30 questions there is mention 

also about the two violations that were rendered as part of the previous two testimonies that preceded me, the violent repression during 28 consecutive Sundays already to the Ladies in White and 

their campaign We All March. The 30 questions are on the Internet. You have it in hand. Time does not suffice for me for so many 

violations. 

That regime does not deserve any support, but demands condemnation and by all the good will men like yourselves. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Rev. Lleonart Barroso follows:]

25


97464c-1.eps
26


97464c-2.eps
27


97464c-3.eps
28


97464c-4.eps
29


97464c-5.eps
30


97464c-6.eps
31


97464c-7.eps
32


97464c-8.eps
33


97464c-9.eps
34

Mr. DUNCAN. Gracias. 

Thank you all for your testimony. The courage this exhibited by 

folks that are oppressed is amazing, and so I thank you for your 

courage. 

And so we are going to enter into the questioning phase. I will 

recognize myself for 5 minutes and then each member will have 5 

minutes as well. 

Mr. Rodiles, you said in your statement, you talked about market 

freedoms about ‘‘the bloc allows for certain market freedoms, all 

the while preserving structures that are subject to fundamental 

rights and freedoms to the interest of strongmen and populists.’’ 

And you also reference the example of China and Vietnam, which 

is held out by certain proponents that want to open up Cuba as examples to where the citizens benefit. 

I would like you to go into that a little bit more. Your comparison 

of China and Vietnam but also what we see Castro Maduro doing 

with allowing some market freedoms but ultimately oppressing the 

populous, if you could just delve into that a little bit more for me. 

Mr. RODILES. Well, reality, they are pretending that they are 

going to open a little bit economy, but in real terms, we see that 

they are trying to open for foreign companies to come to Cuba to 

invest, but they want the rest of Cubans to keep out of these kind 

of businesses and enterprises, not only the Cubans that are inside 

of the island, also the Cubans that are outside. 

They don’t want the Cuban-American capital there. They don’t 

want it really free for economics issues. They want to keep the 

same control in that way. 

For example, if you see right now the taxation, the corruption, 

the political loyalty that they are demanding for the people that get 

involved in business, you realize that the idea is not to start to 

open the economy little by little in the way to create a middle class 

or a class of businessmen. They don’t want that in mind. What 

they want is to create a monopoly from a group of people especially 

in the army that they are controlling right now all the important 

businesses, and they want people to go to Cuba to invest, but the 

kind of people that don’t care about what is happening with Cubans. 

For example, last day we were listening about the Sprint company, the telephone company that went to Cuba to make businesses with ETECSA. And what is happening with ETECSA every 

Sunday, for example, they cut our telephone lines. Sometimes even 

they send a fake message to create this information about what is 

happening with us. Then, what kind of enterprise they are going—

you need to go to Cuba to make business with enterprises that are 

responding all the time to the interests of the political state. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you for that. 

We in America take our access to information for granted I think 

in a lot of ways. Just at my fingertips on a phone I can find out 

pretty much the answer to any question that I may have. I can 

read news stories from around the globe, and I can also get on social media and push out a message. 

Explain to me and the American people—and either witness—

how the lack of having access to an open press and access to information, access to the internet to be able to understand—talk about 

35

the censorship you are seeing in Cuba and Venezuela a little bit 

for us. And I will start with Mr. Rodiles, and then we will go to 

Ms. Iriondo. 

Mr. RODILES. Well, I think that one important point here to understand how it is working, the totalitarian system, we need to understand that in general they are working hard to break the society, to automate the society. And for that they need this information of the people. They need to put the propaganda in the mind 

of people, the rest of the citizens, and to send a message that they 

cannot do anything against the totalitarian regime. And this is 

something crucial. 

If you see the TV in Cuba, you are going to realize that they always—the propaganda is sending the message that everybody that 

is against the system is a mercenary person, is a delinquent, you 

know, all the adjectives, pejorative adjectives in order to diminish 

the moral quality of that person. Then, in all these totalitarian systems, the propaganda is a key issue for them. 

In the case of Cuba there is not any kind of independent media. 

All the media are controlled by the government, and all the time 

they are sending that kind of message and they are controlling all 

the information that is surrounding inside of the country. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Excuse me for interrupting, but I understand in 

Cuba folks on one side of the island don’t know what folks on the 

other side of the island know. There is no continuity of communication or information-sharing. 

This deal with Sprint communications for cellular service, how do 

you think that is going to assist the Cubans being able to communicate and also to share information? 

Mr. RODILES. You mean about the Sprint company or——

Mr. DUNCAN. Sprint, the cellular service just signed an agreement this week——

Mr. RODILES. Yes. 

Mr. DUNCAN [continuing]. Last week with Cuba. Do you think 

that will help facilitate the flow of information? 

Mr. RODILES. You know, the point here is that we need to understand that every contract, or everything that you go to Cuba, that 

you do with the Cuban Government is going to pass through the 

Cuban regime and is going to pass through the state police. This 

is the main point here. When you go to Cuba, you are not making 

business with a company. You are making business with the Cuban 

regime. And they have a huge control apparatus to take everything 

and put in the same path. And the same path is to fight for the 

power, to keep the power. And this is something crucial that we 

need to understand. 

When the Obama administration say that they are going to implement some policies to empower the Cuban people, I don’t know 

why they don’t mention that in order to reach that point, they need 

to convince the Cuban regime to do the steps, because what we see 

now is that they don’t have that movement in mind. What they 

want is to—what they have is a key point is to keep the power. 

And they are not doing anything, absolutely anything that can 

challenge that possibility. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Right. Ms. Iriondo? 

36

Ms. IRIONDO. I would like to reiterate something that Antonio 

said, and also my good friend Dr. Jose Acel in multiple conferences 

have stated over and over again we have to understand that it is 

not doing business in Cuba. It is doing business with Cuba. And 

Cuba is controlled by Castro’s regime. 

So the business you are doing it with the regime, with the military, with the regime that controls all businesses. Being able to 

clean choose is not private enterprise. 

The categories of cuentapropistas, what they are trying to project 

that have been so monumental changes, those are meager jobs. 

And Cubans have to pay taxes and Cubans cannot be employed directly by the foreign companies. They have to go through a state 

agency that, for example, if a worker is paid by a foreign company 

$1,000 for his salary, the government pockets around 91 percent 

and gives the worker the balance, which is almost like forced labor. 

And those practices are the practices that are going on in Cuba. 

As to the Sprint that Rodiles was talking about, what they don’t say is that roaming charges cost $3 a minute. I wonder how many 

Cubans, how much of the independent civil society in Cuba can access roaming at $3 a minute when their monthly salaries amount 

to the equivalent of 20 U.S. dollars. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Wow. That is powerful. Thank you. I am out of 

time. 

I think the most profound statement that you made was when 

you are doing business with Cuba, you are not doing business in 

Cuba, you are doing business with Cuba. And Cuba equals Castro. 

Ms. IRIONDO. Exactly. 

Mr. DUNCAN. No doubt. So I will turn to the ranking member for 

questioning for 5 minutes. 

Mr. GRAYSON. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am going to see whether 

we can all agree that the previous policy of the U.S. Government 

that was sustained for 50 years did not bring freedom or democracy 

to Cuba. Is that a fair statement, Mr. Rodiles? 

Mr. RODILES. Well, but then you need to analyze also that the 

policy that was followed by Canada and Spain and France and 

Mexico didn’t work also. 

Mr. GRAYSON. Okay. But ours didn’t work and that is what I was 

asking. 

What about you, Ms. Iriondo? Is it a fair statement, do we all 

agree that the previous policy did not bring freedom or democracy 

to Cuba? 

Ms. IRIONDO. If I may say U.S. policy for Cuba was not intended 

to bring down the regime but to support the Cuban people, to stand 

in solidarity with the Cuban people. And that policy has impeded 

Castro’s regime from obtaining international credits, which he 

doesn’t pay afterwards, and receiving more resources to stay in 

power. 

I don’t think that U.S. policy failed. I don’t think that when you 

stand by a policy of solidarity with freedom, which is, you know, 

something that we as Americans hold sacred, I don’t think that is 

a failed policy. 

What has failed is a regime——

Mr. GRAYSON. Ms. Iriondo, how would you answer my question? 

Ms. IRIONDO. What has failed is the regime. That is the——

37

Mr. GRAYSON. Ms. Iriondo, how would you answer——

Ms. IRIONDO [continuing]. Failed policy——

Mr. GRAYSON [continuing]. My question? 

Ms. IRIONDO. I don’t agree with your statement that U.S. policy 

has failed. 

Mr. GRAYSON. No, that wasn’t my statement. My question was 

would you agree with me that it failed to bring freedom and democracy to Cuba? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Well, but it has helped the Cuban people within 

their possibilities. The opposition movement is growing. The opposition movement is going forward. And I think that, you know, you 

have to analyze that. I don’t think it is the time to eliminate the 

sanctions, to normalize relations without conditioning that, without 

conditioning that——

Mr. GRAYSON. Ms. Iriondo, why won’t you answer my question? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Let me answer your question. 

Mr. GRAYSON. Please do. 

Ms. IRIONDO. If——

Mr. GRAYSON. Time is limited. 

Ms. IRIONDO [continuing]. Condition your rapprochement with 

the regime to respect for human rights and fundamental liberties, 

the policy fails because it has given unilateral concessions without 

asking or receiving anything in return. 

Mr. GRAYSON. Ms. Iriondo, I am going to ask you one more time, 

and I am hoping that you will answer my question. Is it fair to say 

that the previous policy failed to bring democracy and freedom to 

Cuba? Yes or no? Is that fair to say? 

Ms. IRIONDO. I don’t think it is fair to say that. It has——

Mr. GRAYSON. So you think that the previous policy did bring democracy and freedom——

Ms. IRIONDO. No. 

Mr. GRAYSON [continuing]. To Cuba, we just haven’t——

Ms. IRIONDO. No. No. 

Mr. GRAYSON [continuing]. Noticed it? 

Ms. IRIONDO. But the previous policy was a policy of solidarity 

with the Cuban people. The Cuban people, the——

Mr. GRAYSON. All right. 

Ms. IRIONDO [continuing]. Pro-democracy movement at this time 

feels abandoned——

Mr. GRAYSON. I really wish you——

Ms. IRIONDO [continuing]. Abandoned by the——

Mr. GRAYSON [continuing]. Would answer my question but I am 

going to give——

Ms. IRIONDO [continuing]. Obama administration——

Mr. GRAYSON [continuing]. The reverend a chance to answer the 

question. 

Ms. IRIONDO. No, you want me to answer——

Mr. GRAYSON. Is it——

Ms. IRIONDO [continuing]. Your question——

Mr. GRAYSON. No. No, I am going to have to move on. I begged 

you to answer my question and you refused to do so. 

Ms. IRIONDO. No. 

38

Mr. GRAYSON. Reverend, let me ask you, and please feel free to 

translate this, is it fair to say that the previous policy failed to 

bring democracy and freedom to Cuba? Go ahead. 

Rev. LLEONART BARROSO. It is true that it did not bring it about, 

but I coincide in the sense that it was taking side with suffering 

people. On the other side, many other nations that through a life 

term have negotiated with Cuba, that in other words were applying 

the current U.S. policy, they did not give the Cuban people—for the 

most part, I do believe that it is our duty, not any other country, 

to recover democracy. 

By applying one or the other method, you are not the ones who 

have to bring about democracy for us. But the least that we expect 

and hope for within Cuba is freedom, liberty. For human rights to 

be taken into consideration, and that this always conditions any 

treatment, a treaty or conversation with such a regime which is 

versatile and that they do not want to talk to their own people. 

Mr. GRAYSON. All right. Reverend, thank you very much. I would 

like to ask a question based upon Mr. Rodiles’ testimony. You point 

out and the chairman also pointed out that there are different 

paths out of communism. One path is the path that we saw in the 

Czech Republic and Hungary, countries like that where a country 

adopts not only capitalism but also democracy and freedom and 

basic U.S. and Western principles. Another path, which was also 

alluded to, is the Chinese path or the Vietnamese path in which 

only capitalism is adopted and there is no genuine freedom for individuals in these societies or a functioning democracy where they 

choose their own leaders. 

Which path do you think, Mr. Rodiles, Cuba is likely to follow? 

And what will determine which path Cuba follows? 

Mr. RODILES. Well, I need to define when you say Cuba, the 

Cuban regime, and the Cuban people. For sure, the Cuban people 

want democracy and rule of law. And you can see that with the Cubans that arrived here to Miami, to Florida, to the United States. 

Immediately, they are integrated in the society. They are working. 

They are producing. 

What the Cuban regime wants is a dynasty. They want to control 

the whole country, but the really critical point here is not only with 

Cuba because, as you can see, that kind of philosophy, that kind 

of point of view is spreading in Latin America. And you see what 

is happening in Venezuela. You see what is happening in other 

countries. 

My point here is that it could be really dangerous to accept the 

kind of authoritarian regimes with free market measures as a legitimate system. And this is going to bring a really bad consequence not only for Cubans, not only for Miami and south Florida, but also for the whole region because you are accepting something that is not moral. 

You are accepting that the regime that has been killing people, 

violating their human rights is a legitimate system. I think this is 

a really bad signal for all the region and also for the rest of the 

world. 

Mr. GRAYSON. All right. And, Reverend, I understand that the 

focus of your testimony was religious and this is not exactly a religious question, but I would like to hear your answer as well. 

39

If in fact countries that leave communism can evolve in different 

directions, one direction toward a complete rejection of that kind of 

system and adoption not just of capitalism but also freedom, democracy, and so on, and human rights versus other countries that 

leave communism and adopt only capitalism, which one of those 

two models do you think Cuba is likely to evolve toward, and what 

will determine which one it evolves toward if you may answer that 

question. 

Rev. LLEONART BARROSO. Yes, absolutely. I am quite concerned 

with the intimate relationship with the regime of Putin. And I even 

have come to think that the U.S. policy—I mean the change in policy is trying to move ahead to the presence of Putin in the Western 

Hemisphere. But I must say that they are not going to impede it. 

They have copied and they will copy Putin’s model. They will try 

to keep power by violating the rights of the Cuban people. It is a 

kind of a Putinism more valuable than even somewhere else. They 

continue to be the same. They have violated the rights for decades, 

and I even—on occasions I compare it to North Korea in the sense 

that North Korea might do whatever they do without hiding things. 

They just decree just to shoot, and they just shoot. 

Currently, there is a moratorium in Cuba to the death penalty 

ever since 2003. Even though I am convinced on occasions they 

have made the judicial executions, I am quite convinced that they 

executed Mr. Oswaldo Paya Sardinas and Laura Pollan Toledo, the 

leader of the Ladies in White. 

And I have also been witness to people near my community. I am 

a witness in a particular case of a gentleman, Mr. Soto Garcia, that 

I affirm that he was assassinated because of a beating that he received in May 2012. Several editorials from the government try to 

clean the image saying that they had nothing to do with that. I 

spoke with him before he passed away. He told me what they did 

to him and has accused that regime of doing so. 

In concrete, I do not believe that they will democratize the country. They are intimate friends with North Korea, friends with 

China, Putin. And I am even believing that they are present in 

Syria at this point, more dangerous than what we can imagine not 

only for the people itself but for the Western Hemisphere and the 

U.S. 

If Obama thought that on December 17 giving a change in policy 

it was going to defeat Putin and take Cuba after the wrestling is 

wrong. And Raul Castro are laughing at the U.S. at this point. I 

am truly sorry to say that. 

Mr. GRAYSON. Thank you, Reverend. Thank you, Mr. Translator. 

And thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. DUNCAN. I thank the ranking member and then I will turn 

to Mr. DeSantis. And I am going to need to step away. When you 

finish, I am going to give you the power to recognize Mr. Curbelo. 

Mr. DESANTIS [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Iriondo, bravo. I agreed with everything you said. I think 

you are right on. And, you know, this new policy is really a boon 

to the regime because it is a failed regime. They are insolvent. 

They need credit. They need money. This really is going to allow 

them to solidify themselves in power. So the question we have to 

ask is what is America getting in return for this? You mentioned 

40

the Brothers to the Rescue. Has there been any restitution or apology from the Cuban regime for those murders? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Not from the Cuban regime, no. 

Mr. DESANTIS. No, of course not. 

Ms. IRIONDO. And the perpetrators have not been incited either. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Right. Joanne Chesimard, you mentioned her. 

She is on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted Terrorists list, killed a cop in 

New Jersey, flees justice, and she is given safe haven in Cuba. Has 

there been any commitment to extradite her to the United States 

so she can face justice? 

Ms. IRIONDO. No. Although the FBI offers $1 million for her return——

Mr. DESANTIS. And so——

Ms. IRIONDO [continuing]. Even though she is in Cuba. 

Mr. DESANTIS. And so if you are harboring a terrorist, what is 

the evidence to then remove the regime from the list of terroristsponsoring country? Has there been any change in behavior that 

would warrant their removal from the list? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Nothing at all. I think it was a convenient 

accomodation because of the fact that the Obama administration is 

set on this new Cuba policy. That, in my opinion, is not helping the 

Cuban people, but it is empowering the regime to stay in power 

and providing the necessary mechanisms to get the regime the sufficient resources they need at the time when the Venezuela monies 

are not coming as they used to come. So it is a crucial time in 

Cuba’s history, and this crucial time that we are lending the lifesaving line to the Castro regime. 

The change in the policy was announced almost a year ago. You 

know how many Cubans have escaped to the United States in the 

last year? Forty-three thousand Cubans. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Wow. 

Ms. IRIONDO. Does that tell you that things are better in Cuba? 

Mr. DESANTIS. No. And I think you are right. I mean this was 

a critical time where this regime really did need a lifeline. And the 

question is people always say, oh, this policy didn’t work, you guys 

were doing all this stuff. So the question is, when you are changing 

a policy, are you making it easier for the Cuban people to leverage 

a democratic transition, or are you solidifying the Castro brothers 

in power and allowing the dictatorship to continue even after they 

perish? And I would say this policy is setting up the Castro brothers so that their regime continues far into the future. Do you agree 

with that? 

Ms. IRIONDO. I agree with that. And do you abandon a just policy 

for the sake of empowering a regime at a crucial moment when, 

you know, the regime and the internal opposition are struggling 

and increasing in numbers. You don’t do that. And that is exactly 

what has happened and that is why we believe that the new Cuba 

policy is wrong, and it doesn’t do anything for the Cuban people. 

Mr. DESANTIS. You know, people will say, oh, this embargo, it 

hasn’t overthrown the Castro regime. The problem is that was not 

the intent of the embargo. The embargo was instituted in response 

to all the property seizures that the regime had done. 

And so Chairman Duncan has done good work in this Congress 

of actually bringing people in to testify to Congress, both Cuban exVerDate 0ct 09 2002 16:37 Dec 18, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_WH\110615\97464 SHIRL
41

iles and people who were American citizens in Cuba at the time 

who had their property seized. And has there been any commitment to pay any of the certified claims, or any restitution or apology for seizing that private property? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Not only that, when you see General Raul Castro, 

dictator Raul Castro, he is defiant as ever. He is defiant as ever. 

And his regime has been an enemy of the United States, responsible for anti-Americanism in the Western Hemisphere. And he 

continues to do so. He demands and Obama gives. That is the way 

it is. 

Mr. DESANTIS. And it is frustrating because, you know, we really 

are dedicated to the idea of the rule of law, and so we are saying, 

oh, you know, let’s throw an economic lifeline. You are going to 

have commerce so you may actually be having goods pulling up to 

a port that was seized from somebody. You will have people staying 

in Cuba who will be sitting in a hotel that was seized from somebody else. How is that advancing the rule of law if we are legitimizing a government simply taking somebody else’s property outside the constraints of a legal and democratic system? 

So I am really frustrated when I hear some businesspeople say, 

oh, we just go to do this. Now, how would you feel if somebody 

seized your property and then started making money off of it? 

And you brought up a good point. There has been trade with 

Cuba for—I mean Europeans will go. They will vacation there. And 

as I understand it, the regime, the intelligence services, the military, they will get, you know, Euros and then they pay the Cuban 

people worthless Cuban pesos. So it is all going to help this elite 

ruling class and really keep the rest of the population in an 

enslaved state. 

So we will hear a lot of times, well, look, we just got to try something new. We have got to try something new. Anything will be 

better than what we have done. What is your response to that 

when people will say that to you? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Well, I remember when Batista was in power and 

in Cuba everybody said anything is better than Batista. And look 

what we got. So anything is not better. Only the best is better. And 

that is an example of all this. 

I wanted also to say something that illustrates the problem of 

the concessions we are seeing that are not warranted or merited. 

If I may because I was going to say it in my testimony but I had 

not enough time to do so, there is no better example of this problem than the upgrading of the rating in the human Trafficking in 

Persons report published by the Department of State a few weeks 

ago. The report deals with human trafficking, slave labor, prostitution, and child sexual abuse, and sex tourism with minors. Ironically, while more tourists are going to Cuba, the U.S. Government 

reports that there is less sexual tourism, including child sexual 

abuse by foreigners. 

This is a crime that Congressman Christopher Smith, member of 

this subcommittee, has fought against for many years. According to 

a Reuters article, administration sources that wish not to be identified complained that Cuba, Malaysia, Russia, and others got a better ranking than they deserved and that the final ranking came 

42

about as a result of improper pressure on the office that prepared 

the report by higher State Department officials. 

These are the kind of unilateral concessions, list of terrorist 

states, this, the human trafficking that are not warranted, totally 

unwarranted. You were talking about other countries doing business in Cuba for many years. Has anything changed? A lot of tourists from many countries for many years. Have visitors brought 

about freedom and democracy in Cuba? Why do we think it is 

wrong? Why do we think that Cuba policy was one of solidarity 

with the Cuban people? Very simple. Because it is the right thing 

to do. Is it the just thing to do. Cubans deserve no more, but certainly, they deserve no less. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Well, thank you. And I think that, you know, as 

you look to—I am open to always reevaluating any policies we 

have, but here is the deal. With policy toward Cuba, it has got to 

be focused, to me, on two things: standing with the Cuban people 

against the Castro regime and then what is in the best interest of 

the United States. And to me they are one in the same in this example because the regime in Cuba, not only have they brutalized 

their own people, they represent a significant security threat to our 

country. 

Now, you know, we say the cold war is over, all this. You know, 

we hear reports of more Russian influence, we hear other—the fact 

of the matter is this is a regime that associates with some of the 

worst regimes throughout the world. And why would we want a regime like that, you know, 90 miles from our shore. 

So my hope is that this policy has been in place now for almost 

a year. I think the results have really spoken for themselves. And 

this idea that if you just make concessions to the Castro brothers, 

we are going to be able to turn the page has been proven wrong, 

and I think that our policy needs to be one of solidarity with the 

Cuban people who are fighting for freedom. And so I thank all the 

witnesses. 

I am going to now yield to my good friend from south Florida and 

obviously a great defender of human rights around the world, Mr. 

Curbelo. 

Mr. CURBELO. Thank you very much, Congressman DeSantis. 

Mr. Rodiles, thank you for your heroic opposition to the Castro 

government, and thank you for being here today. 

For decades, almost every country in the world has had full diplomatic and commercial relationships with the Castro regime. You 

have been in Cuba. How has that policy of full engagement, unconditional engagement, how has that policy benefitted the Cuban people? 

Mr. RODILES. Well——

Mr. CURBELO. Or has it? 

Mr. RODILES. Yes, I want to mention something related with this 

change of policy. Before this day last December, the European 

Union that now is involved in a kind of agreement with the Cuban 

Government was pushing to the regime to ratify the U.N. Covenants, the U.N. Covenants related with human rights. And also 

they were pushing for the implementation of the international 

worker organization to implement those norms. But what happened 

after December that those points disappear from the agenda. And 

43

then what happened was this new policy is sending a really wrong 

message. 

Mr. CURBELO. Yes. I agree. But my question to you is for many 

decades, many countries, almost all of them have had full diplomatic and commercial relations with the Cuban regime, with the 

Castro regime. Did that policy of engagement make the Cuban people more free? Did it improve the human rights situation——

Mr. RODILES. For sure, no. 

Mr. CURBELO [continuing]. In Cuba? 

Mr. RODILES. Is it clear that no. 

Mr. CURBELO. Okay. Thank you. 

Mr. RODILES. Let me say something quickly. 

Mr. CURBELO. Briefly, please. 

Mr. RODILES. Yes. Sometimes people, the argument is that we 

need to change the policy, and that is true. We can change the policy but we cannot make the policy worse. We need to improve what 

we are doing. 

Mr. CURBELO. I agree with that. Ms. Iriondo, thank you for being 

here today. The Cuban regime during the Soviet subsidies was 

cash-rich. It had many resources. What was it doing with these resources? What was the Cuban military doing? What does the 

Cuban Government do when it has a lot of access to cash? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Strengthen its repressive apparatus and unleash a 

wave of repression against everyone that dares or intends to speak 

out or to do something against the state. 

Mr. CURBELO. And what was it doing around the world during 

those times when they had so much access to cash——

Ms. IRIONDO. They were——

Mr. CURBELO [continuing]. And when they could invest heavily 

in their military? What were they doing? 

Ms. IRIONDO. They were exporting the revolution, undermining 

democratic governments, assisting guerillas——

Mr. CURBELO. Were they fighting Americans——

Ms. IRIONDO. They were fighting, yes. 

Mr. CURBELO [continuing]. In different theaters? 

Ms. IRIONDO. They were fighting and they were providing also intelligence security and security agents to a lot of places, including 

Venezuela where there are more than 35,000 agents of the state security apparatus. 

Mr. CURBELO. Do you think that after the fall of the Soviet 

Union our sanctions policy helped debilitate the Cuban military 

and limit their ability export revolution to train guerilla forces to 

fight American soldiers in different theaters of war? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Yes, it did. Yes, it did. 

Mr. CURBELO. And do you expect that the Cuban Government, if 

they have access again to plentiful resources, that they will try to 

become international players once again and confront the United 

States throughout the world? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Undoubtedly. They have done it directly. They 

have——

Mr. CURBELO. As a matter of fact——

Ms. IRIONDO [continuing]. Done it directly. 

44

Mr. CURBELO [continuing]. The Cuban Government, even despite 

the fact that it doesn’t have access to resources the way it used to, 

has destroyed Venezuela in our own hemisphere? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Yes. When you hear dictator Raul Castro in his 

statements or you hear Bruno Rodriguez, they are already doing it. 

They are going and you see President Obama on one side granting 

this unilateral concessions and speaking, you know, about the rapprochement and the normalization of relations, and you see the regime demanding things, demanding things more and more and 

more everywhere they talk. So they are doing it. And the more resources they have, the more they are going to try to undermine because that is the nature of the beast. And the regime is not reformable. 

Mr. CURBELO. Mr. Rodiles, you live in Cuba. Ms. Iriondo mentioned earlier that since the announcement of the new policy, 

43,000 Cubans at least have escaped the island. Now, without 

question, on December 17, beyond changing United States policy 

toward Cuba, the Obama administration, together with the Castro 

dictatorship, shared a new vision for Cuba, a new vision for the relationship between the United States and Cuba. Do you interpret 

that these at least 43,000 Cubans, many who have risked their 

lives to leave the island since then, is that their reaction to the policy change? 

Mr. RODILES. No, I think this is the real pool about what Cuban 

people are thinking about the new scenario because who is going 

to take that risk if they think that the future is going to be better, 

if they feel optimistic? It is clear that people don’t believe that the 

regime is going to change anything. Every people in Cuba is completely convinced that during the—if these people keep in power, 

the reality is not going to change. This is something that people always say in the street. If they keep there, anything is going to 

change. And I think that this situation, this exodus that we are 

watching right now, this is a clear message about the criteria that 

people have about this new policy. 

Mr. CURBELO. I am glad you used that word exodus because in 

1994 about 40,000 Cubans fled on rafts. Now, that was very dramatic because they all fled at the same time. However, what we 

are seeing now is a repeat of that 1994 phenomenon. Ms. Iriondo. 

Do you believe that this is—because the Obama administration 

says that their new policy is wildly popular in Cuba and that the 

Cuban people are now full of hope for the future. Now, if that is 

true, why would so many seek to flee risking their lives in many 

cases, others taking a very difficult journey through Mexico where 

they are the victims of these human traffickers, these coyotes? Why 

would they be doing this if there is this renewed sense of hope and 

optimism in Cuba? 

Ms. IRIONDO. Because the answer is clear. There is no hope in 

Cuba as long as the regime is in power. The regime has not 

changed and the Cuban people do not expect the regime to change. 

That is why they risk their lives. That is why we have 43,000 so 

far since December 17, 2014. 

Mr. CURBELO. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

45

Mr. DESANTIS. I thank the gentleman. And I would like to thank 

the witnesses of our first panel for your courage and the courage 

that you have shown here today. I want to invite you to stay for 

the remainder of the hearing, but we will recess now and we will 

consider the events in Venezuela through panel II. And the subcommittee will recess for a couple minutes while we set back up. 

Ms. IRIONDO. Mr. Chairman, can I leave with you the photos of 

the Panama assault? 

Mr. DESANTIS. Yes, you can. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. IRIONDO. Thank you. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Thank you. And we will stand in recess. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. DUNCAN. The subcommittee will come to order. As I mentioned, the panel I witnesses—before I recognize you on panel II to 

provide your testimony, know that each of you will have 5 minutes 

to present your oral statement. And please try to keep within 5 

minutes. We are on a tight time crunch. 

Before we get started, I am going to recognize Mr. DeSantis for 

an opening statement. He has an airplane to catch. 

Mr. DESANTIS. Yes, I apologize. I will read your statements. I 

was not able to get a later flight so I am going to have to scooch 

out to the airport. But I just wanted to say that I, as well as the 

chairman of this committee, stands forthrightly behind the people 

of Venezuela who are being oppressed by the Maduro government, 

a thuggish socialist dictatorship. And we need change in Venezuela, and we need a policy that recognizes the interests of the 

Venezuelan people to live in a country that recognizes their Godgiven human rights. And we are committed on this committee to 

going in that direction, and I wish everybody the best. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DUNCAN. And I want to thank the gentleman for taking time 

to be here today and for his great questioning. 

So the witnesses will testify. We do have copies of your bios in 

our material that is provided to all the members, so I will not read 

those. We are going to move directly into your testimony. And 

other members of the committee, after press events, will make it 

back to the dias. 

But, Ms. Adriana Lo ́pez Vermut, you are recognized for 5 minutes. Pull that microphone close. Thanks. 

STATEMENT OF MS. ADRIANA LO ́ PEZ VERMUT, SISTER OF 

LEOPOLDO LO ́ PEZ 

Ms. LO ́ PEZ VERMUT. Thank you. Honorable Chairman Jeff Duncan and members of the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, thank you for inviting me to testify today and taking the 

time to hear my family’s story. 

My name is Adriana Lo ́pez Vermut, and I am the younger sister 

of Leopoldo Lo ́pez, leader of the opposition party Voluntad Popular 

and former mayor of the Chacao municipality of Caracas. 

Since February 19, 2014, Leopoldo has been wrongly imprisoned 

in a military prison in Venezuela. His arrest has been declared arbitrary by the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which has called on Venezuela to immediately free him. 

46

The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 

United Nations Committee Against Torture, the Secretary General 

of the Organization of American States, President Barack Obama, 

Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos, and more than 40 other 

current and past Latin American heads of states have echoed this 

call for his release. Amnesty International has labeled Leopoldo a 

prisoner of conscience. 

Leopoldo is in jail because of his ideas. At a series of peaceful 

protests in February 2014, he gave speeches calling for nonviolent, 

democratic change in Venezuela in accordance with its Constitution. Despite the repeated emphasis on urging a transition through 

nonviolence and adherence to the Constitution, the government 

issued a warrant for his arrest that day claiming for his goal to 

overthrow the government through violent means. 

After more than 11⁄2 years in jail, on September 10, 2015, 

Leopoldo was convicted of all charges and sentenced to 13 years 

and 9 months in prison. On that terrible day, Leopoldo responded 

to this terrible conviction by saying, ‘‘Today, they condemn me. But 

it is the regime that is condemned, for the people of Venezuela will 

set me free.’’

While Leopoldo is obviously innocent, his conviction was not a 

surprise. From the moment that a warrant for his arrest was 

issued, we knew that the latest target of a ruthless authoritarian 

regime that seeks to silence dissent. 

Leopoldo’s trial was a farce. Six hundred hours of prosecution 

presenting their case and over 100 witnesses with no witnesses or 

evidence allowed from the defense. 

While it was not a surprise, it was gratifying to see the defection 

of the lead prosecutor in the case against Leopoldo, Franklin 

Nieves, who came to the United States last week and openly admitted that he was pressured by the Venezuelan Government to bring 

false accusations against Leopoldo. 

Leopoldo’s imprisonment has not been easy. He has spent half of 

his time in solitary confinement and at the whim of the prison 

guards. He has been subject to countless violent searches of his cell 

and is routinely denied visitors as punishment for his actions and 

those of his wife, Lilian Tintori, who has undertaken intense advocacy for his release. At one low point, prison guards threw urine 

and feces into Leopoldo’s cell and then cut off the water to clean 

it. 

Currently, Leopoldo is the only prisoner in a building that consists of 30 cells. He has a 7-by-10-foot cell that has nothing more 

than a bed, a toilet, and a shelf for a change of clothes. He is not 

allowed writing materials and is only permitted to read the Bible. 

And there is no electricity or light when it is dark outside. Each 

month, he is moved to a different dirty cell to maximize his discomfort. 

The government’s persecution of Leopoldo has affected my entire 

family. Government officials regularly attack our family on national TV. President Maduro has accused Lilian of treason, which 

carries a 30-year prison sentence in Venezuela. My father was 

forced to go into exile after a newspaper on whose board he sits 

was accused of criminal libel against speaker of the National Assembly Diosdado Cabello. Last month, government-sponsored thugs 

47

tried kidnapping our older sister, Diana. Fortunately, they failed. 

We routinely fear for Leopoldo’s life, and we fear for our own life 

as well. 

No one in the world should doubt why Leopoldo is in prison. 

Maduro is afraid of him. Even as Leopoldo sits in prison, the independent polling firm Datanalisis showed that in a Presidential 

matchup between Maduro and Leopoldo is up by 32 percentage 

points. 

Furthermore, Maduro has not delivered on his promises. His actions have delivered difficulties that Venezuelans are experiencing 

today. We have the second-highest murder rate in the world, 

25,000 deaths in 2014 in a country where 97 percent of our crimes 

go unpunished. 

The desperate plight of our country, which has included an annual inflation rate of 159 percent and our GDP is expected to 

shrink by 10 percent in 2015 alone, has led to drastic shortages of 

food and medical supplies. 

My country is on the edge of a humanitarian crisis that could 

have devastating effects on the regional stability. The repressive 

regime has created a beleaguered nation that is struggling. Thus 

far, the United States has taken a strong stand advocating for the 

rights of the Venezuelan people, but there is more that the government can do. We need Latin American leaders to move from rhetoric to action. The U.S. can help push the situation of Venezuela 

to be discussed in multilateral fora, such as the OAS, the U.N. 

Human Rights Council, and the U.N. General Assembly. 

Additionally, on December 6, Venezuela will have parliamentary 

elections, and in order for these to be significant, the people of Venezuela must have faith in the process. Currently, the Venezuelan 

Government has rejected offers of international electoral observation from the OAS and the United Nations. The United States 

must continue to pressure the government to accept observation 

from qualified observers. 

I am proud that Leopoldo’s case has become a rallying cry 

around the world and the lens through which countless of millions 

of people can see the authoritarian regime in Venezuela. Through 

Leopoldo’s case, the world has come to know the suffering of the 

Venezuelan people. We must have hope that Venezuelans will persevere against this severe repression and that the world will rally 

with us. 

Fuerza y fe. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Lo ́pez Vermut follows:]

48


97464d-1.eps
49


97464d-2.eps
50


97464d-3.eps
51


97464d-4.eps
52


97464d-5.eps
53

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. And 

your brother is in our thoughts and prayers. And I am too glad he 

has become a rallying cry. So thank you for being here today. 

I now recognize the next panelist, Mr. Vecchio Demari. 

STATEMENT OF MR. CARLOS VECCHIO DEMARI, LAWYER, 

NATIONAL POLITICAL COORDINATOR, VOLUNTAD POPULAR 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman Duncan 

and the other members of this committee. I want to thank you for 

this opportunity to give us our testimony regarding the violation of 

human rights in Venezuela. I am particularly—the election that we 

are going to have this December. 

This is the first time that I have the opportunity to testify before 

a formal and independent institution so this gives you an example 

of how difficult the situation is in Venezuela and the lack of separation of power. 

I want to divide my testimony in three parts. The one, it will be 

related to the protest in 2014; the second one will be related to the 

election day with the election process; and the last one, sound recommendation that I want to give you for your consideration. 

So let me talk about the 2014 protest. I remember that I had 

that discussion with Leopoldo Lo ́pez and the students who are related to the student movement. At that time we decided that we 

needed to urge the Venezuelan people to protest peacefully, to defend our rights according to our Constitution and against the 

Maduro regime due to the economic, social, and political problems 

that we are facing right now and we face at that time. They do not 

clearly reflect the crisis that we are facing. This year is even worse 

than last year, and it will be critical next year. 

So Maduro regime reacted against us because we were exercising 

constitutional rights. We had been persecuted because of our ideas, 

our democratic speeches. This has been our crime according to the 

government, according to Maduro. That is why Maduro decided to 

put in jail Leopoldo. Five days later they issue an order of arrest 

against me for the same reason, for the same crimes, and again, 

without evidence because we were exercising our constitutional 

rights. 

I remember that in February 17 in 2014 I had to receive three 

violent attempts of arrest for the military force from the government. They couldn’t capture at that time. Then I decided to spend 

108 days in hiding in Venezuela in order to continue our, you 

know, political activities in a very difficult situation receiving many 

type of threats during those days. 

After those days, after an internal discussion with my political 

party, we decided that I needed to play an international role, that 

I had to leave Venezuela to be a voice in the international arena. 

Let me tell you this. This has been the most difficult decision that 

I have ever taken. I had to leave my country because of political 

reasons for the way that I am thinking political. 

That is not the Venezuela that we deserve. That is not the system that we deserve for the region. And that moment when I was 

leaving my country, it left a mark in my soul saying this moment 

had to give more faith, more strength in order to continue our 

struggle. And that is what I have been doing outside of Venezuela. 

54

Recently, as Adriana said, two of the lead prosecutors left Venezuela and said that he received order directly from Maduro to put 

Leopoldo in jail and also against me. That was a clear testimony, 

which confirmed what we have been saying national and international, that there is a generalized and a systematic state policy 

from the government to intimidate and to persecute the Venezuelan people who are thinking different from the government. 

And that persecution, that intimidation is still ongoing in Venezuela. So the judicial system is used by the government to persecute the opposition that this is in Venezuela. 

So this is the aspect regarding our participation in the protest 

and how I have been affected, how they are violating my human 

rights during those days. 

The second part of my testimony is regarding the upcoming election in December 6. To illustrate to you what we are facing for this 

process, let’s do a short exercise of imagination. Let’s start with 

this. Imagine that Obama abusing of his power prohibit 10 of the 

most popular Republican candidate to participate in the primary 

process they are going right now in process. So imagine that he can 

prohibit 10 of the 15 candidates in the primary process of the Republican Party. Imagine that Obama also can prohibit those candidates to do campaign in those swing States but not to the other 

candidates. Imagine that Obama prohibits CNN and Fox to broadcast the Republican debates. 

So this exercise of imagination is a reality in Venezuela. Maduro 

has done all what I just said. They have prohibited 10 opposition 

leaders to participate as a candidate in this election. I am one of 

them. They have controlled the media so it is quite difficult for the 

opposition to communicate our message to the rest of the people. 

They have declared a state of emergency in certain border states 

so it is quite difficult to campaign freely. They have militarized 

those states so it is quite complicated to do campaign in that condition. 

So let me tell you a little bit more about my case. I presented 

my candidacy before the electoral branch and that candidacy was 

eliminated. I was competing against Diosdado Cabello, who is the 

current president of the Congress in Venezuela. Fifteen days later 

I read in the news that somebody challenged my candidacy. They 

did not defy me and they didn’t the opportunity to me to express 

my arguments and they decided to cancel my candidacy under the 

absurd and unconstitutional argument that my candidacy was an 

affront of law because my intention was not to represent my estate 

but rather to gain parliamentarian immunity in order to avoid my 

order of arrest. 

That is something that we couldn’t understand. And as I said, 

that is a violation of my human rights because in order to restrict 

a political right in Venezuela, you have to issue a final and enforceable sentence. 

Finally——

Mr. DUNCAN. I am going to need you to wrap up. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Yes. Finally, my recommendation to you, 

I want to highlight three points. One, you need to work in our view 

the U.S. Government with the government—with the Congress in 

Latin America in order to protect and to support human rights in 

55

Venezuela and to defend the principle of democracy. That is one 

recommendation that we think it could work to help us in order to 

defend democracy in Venezuela. 

Second one, we need qualified observers for the next coming election. You need to discuss with the region as well how can we have 

this independent observer for our election. 

And finally, finally, I think you can promote legislation in order 

to facilitate political asylum or the immigration process for Venezuelans. 

Thank you very much. 

[Mr. Vecchio Demari did not submit a prepared statement until 

after the start of the hearing. It appears in the appendix.] 

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you. 

Ms. Pacheco for 5 minutes, please. 

STATEMENT OF MS. IBE ́ YISE PACHECO, VENEZUELAN 

JOURNALIST AND WRITER 

[The following statement and answers were delivered through an 

interpreter.] 

Ms. PACHECO. Good afternoon. 

Kluivert Roa supplicated onto the police officer, please do not kill 

me. Don’t kill me. The official shot him at a short distance in the 

head with a 12 caliber gunshot with plastic bullets. This caused a 

deadly injury in his cranium. Kluivert was 14 years old. According 

to witnesses, Kluivert was just coming out of class and he just 

came across a rally of youngsters. It was in San Cristo ́bal, a city 

at the southwestern part of Venezuela. 

Kluivert, as a good Samaritan, he stopped to assist another student who had been injured. He was taken by surprise by one representative of the police forces of the Bolivarian regime of Maduro 

who kill him while being on his knees. It took place on February 

24, 2015. 

Last year, 24,980 citizens were killed as victims of the violence. 

We are the second country with homicide in the world. Besides 

that, in Venezuela there are 74 political prisoners. More than 2,000 

people have outstanding judicial proceedings. And there are 3,775 

detentions had been carried out only on account of rallies during 

last year. 

With violations to the right of defense, to the due process, with 

torture and cruel treatment, with electrical shocks and sex violations or rape, threats of violations and rapes, suffocation with plastic bags, multiple fractures and other injuries. 

Last June 17, Beatriz Lara, a reporter with the Aragueno newspaper, she was placed in handcuffs to an electricity pole for a couple of hours in the middle of news coverage. This bothered police 

officials in the middle of the country. The female reporter, along 

with a cameraman, they were subjected in the street to beating and 

insults, along with kickings. Not being enough in such a situation 

and mistreatment, the female reporter was ripped off of her clothing arguing that she had a weapon in her intimate parts. To prove 

that that was not the case, she had to jump and down while squatting as if she was a kangaroo. 

These facts, along with many other facts that I know, the representative could have heard are unknown by the Venezuelan peoVerDate 0ct 09 2002 16:37 Dec 18, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_WH\110615\97464 SHIRL
56

ple, and they are unknown, they are not aware of those because of 

the force, control exerted by the Maduro regime. This regime, 

which is in charge of silencing the truth and create terror and misrepresent the facts in their best interest. The justice or judicial system in Venezuela, if you can call it like that, utilized a sensor to 

chastise the exercise of journalism to threaten——

Mr. DUNCAN. Ms. Pacheco, I am going to ask you to start wrapping up. Hit some of the highlights and wrap up just in the sense 

of time. Thank you. 

Ms. PACHECO. Yes. I am summarizing it because I just heard the 

Cuban attendees to take 10 up until 12 minutes. Mine is not going 

to go beyond 7 minutes. That is for certain. 

The judicial Venezuelan system said journalists and owners of 

media, local, domestic and foreigners are persecuted by the tribunals and that are managed by the monarchy of the regime exposing 

us to the public damage by bands of criminals. 

In other cases, the media has been put to their knees by other 

criminals or they have been acquired by branches of the government to create them into a mechanism—apparatuses of their propaganda. The little window, even though it is vital that entails the 

social media, it is weakened by detentions of traitors for detentions 

for months without any help. It is very simple. The plan is to isolate the country. 

But also the information sources are persecuted. The doctor that 

files a complaint goes to jail. Same destiny for his or her own area, 

his own educator, a union member or a business person, any user 

that complains about discourtesy, and even about a politician that 

you already listened to his testimony. 

Great danger risks them who protects the one in need or who 

protects the human rights. But even two attempts of suicide by 

Marcelo Crovato and months of prison move his killers to piety. 

This is not a new situation. I personally have been persecuted by 

the regime ever since the year 2001. I have suffered 20 trials, 

grave and serious investigations and public accusations. I was incarcerated in 2005. I have gone to international organizations and 

not even now when I live in the U.S. have the attacks ceased. 

I want to call on the attention of the particular case of Diosdado 

Cabello who has been investigated upon here by the authorities of 

this country on the alleged basis of narco trafficking. 

Mr. DUNCAN. I really need you to wrap up. 

Ms. PACHECO. Okay. Okay. I am going to wrap up. 

Cabello uses the Venezuelan official media to submit all the Venezuelans to the public criticism and all of the mechanisms of the 

state. 

Fear cannot stop us if we are all united and raise our voices 

against the regime. 

Finally, I ask myself, how would Venezuela be today if democratic governments had listened to the alarms that have been 

beeping since more than a decade ago. The Maduro regime fails to 

comply with the laws and human rights. Is it not the case that any 

institution or international institution or government is an accomplice who knowingly in the face of this case keeps silent or does not 

care about acting? Is it not the case that international agreements 

57

are executed to accomplished and fulfilled and to make them be 

fulfilled? 

Just a few days ago, posting of a picture of a candidate for the 

police force of the Maduro regime started to go around in the social 

media. Face of an 18-year-old girl laughing with the grenade in her 

hands, the same as is done by the criminal groups that assassinate 

people in my country. 

With all due respect, I tell you I refuse for that to become our 

future. I did not want that either to extend on to this continent because I confess to you we feel helpless. Anyway, thank you for listening to me today. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Pacheco follows:]

58


97464e-1.eps
59


97464e-2.eps
60


97464e-3.eps
61


97464e-4.eps
62


97464e-5.eps
63


97464e-6.eps
64


97464e-7.eps
65


97464e-8.eps
66


97464e-9.eps
67


97464e-10.eps
68


97464e-11.eps
69


97464e-12.eps
70


97464e-13.eps
71


97464e-14.eps
72


97464e-15.eps
73


97464e-16.eps
74


97464e-17.eps
75


97464e-18.eps
76


97464e-19.eps
77


97464e-20.eps
78

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you for that. We lost our other Members of 

Congress just because of their schedules, so I will recognize myself 

for as much time as I need to ask all the questions that I want to 

ask. 

Do you think—and this is to all the panelists. Do you think the 

elections will be truly free and fair? 

Ms. LO ́ PEZ VERMUT. I am not a politician but I have a brother 

who is a politician who should have the right to run in fair elections, and he is in prison, alongside other politicians who are being 

banned to run. So, no, there cannot be fair elections if the opponents are not allowed to run. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. No. Absolutely no. As I said, the government of Maduro has taken several actions in order precisely to 

avoid to have a fair and a transparent election. That is why we are 

asking for an international independent observer in order to watch 

the electoral process. We don’t trust institutions in Venezuela. We 

trust in the people and we need a massive participation. We need 

an organization which is capable to overcome those obstacles that 

the government is putting in place in order to avoid defeat. 

All polls show that the opposition will win by a large margin. 

That is why Maduro regime is taking this type of actions, to avoid 

that, and that is why we are coming to the international community to support what we see right now in our society, a change——

Mr. DUNCAN. Right. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI [continuing]. Which is a reversible change. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Ms. Pacheco? 

Ms. PACHECO. A fundamental aspect during these elections and 

this is going to happen is the darkest moment of the exercise of 

journalism in the country. There is no communication or media 

that can communicate the truth. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Usually, where aggressions are committed 

in the educational center——

Mr. DUNCAN. Senor Vecchio—what role does the U.S. and international community play in this? With regard to the elections, how 

can we assure that they are free and fair? I mean what more can 

we do? 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Well, I would say you should get in contact 

with Latin American countries in order to work in the multilateral 

organizations such as OAS and even UNASUR in order to build 

independent and a technical observer to play a role in the Venezuelan election. We are a month for that election. I think it is 

going to be quite difficult but I think what you need to do an effort, 

working especially with Latin American countries because this will 

affect not only the Venezuelans but also it could bring an instability to the region if we do not have a fair and a transparent election in which the Venezuelans could trust. So it is a very critical 

moment. So I would say that you should work with the rest of the 

Latin American countries and with the multilateral organizations. 

Mr. DUNCAN. December 6 is coming awfully quickly. I want to 

ask about Leopoldo. What impact has his arrest and his detention 

and this recent sentencing had on your family and his wife and 

children? 

Ms. LO ́ PEZ VERMUT. You must imagine it is a very hard situation. We have always been supporters of Leopoldo’s career path. He 

79

has been a politician for over 10 years. This has affected my nieces, 

my nephew. They are growing up and they know what it is to visit 

a jail, what it is to have somebody that drives you to school be kidnapped and beaten on your behalf. They have seen people killed 

protecting their father. Psychologically, I think that will have a 

lasting impact on them. 

My father is an exile. He cannot go back to Venezuela. There is 

a warrant for his arrest. My sister was almost kidnapped. My sister-in-law and my mother are in Venezuela. They continue to support Leopoldo and they bravely do so. 

We are being persecuted. We have been persecuted for multiple 

years, but it has affected the family dynamic. We don’t know for 

how long. Hopefully, it will not be for 14 years. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Is there any chance that his sentence would be 

shortened? 

Ms. LO ́ PEZ VERMUT. We definitely hope so. I——

Mr. DUNCAN. I mean is there precedence for that in the past? 

Ms. LO ́ PEZ VERMUT. I don’t think so. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Yes. 

Ms. LO ́ PEZ VERMUT. I don’t think so. 

Mr. DUNCAN. That is——

Ms. LO ́ PEZ VERMUT. Unless he is given house arrest, which is a 

possibility. One of the things that we really would like for the 

United States is to do is to allow for the International Red Cross 

to be accepted in Venezuela to visit the prisons. Leopoldo’s mental 

health is of great concern in that we want to make sure that he 

gets access to books, that he gets access to regular light, that he 

gets access to exercise, to written material, to visitors. He is not 

a terrorist. He should be allowed his human and prisoner rights to 

be observed, and they are not. 

And the government does not allow any observers of the conditions of prisoners in Venezuela to be assessed. That is another 

point of support that we can get from the United States. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Wow. I am going to ask all panelists, we talked in 

the first panel about access to freedom of speech, access to a free 

and open press, the dissemination of information, access to the 

Internet, and so how do people stay informed in Venezuela? Is online media restricted? Is there social media available? Help educate 

us about how people stay informed in Venezuela. And that is to everyone, but I will start with Ms. Pacheco. 

Ms. PACHECO. Yes, the system is very marginal, very limited and 

usually very distorted because the government has purchased the 

majority of the media. So they have made it into apparatuses for 

their propaganda. And social network, which is the small network, 

which is not as important, is important. Their users are subject of 

persecution. They have also been persecuted. They have been detained. They have been hacked. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Mr. Vecchio, you are in exile so to speak. Are you 

able to communicate back into your country? 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. You know, I use the social media in order 

to get information from Venezuela. I don’t trust in the media. In 

the media in Venezuela it is quite difficult to get information from 

them, and if I want to communicate with them through, for example, Skype or even call them, I have to be aware that the governVerDate 0ct 09 2002 16:37 Dec 18, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\_WH\110615\97464 SHIRL
80

ment is going to record that conversation. So it is quite difficult to 

keep that communication clear and transparent. So it is not that 

easy. It is not that easy. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Does the government block some of the emails or 

social media, tweets——

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. They capture that and they will use it 

against you. 

Mr. DUNCAN. They capture it and use it against them but——

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Yes, illegally. 

Mr. DUNCAN [continuing]. They don’t block it? 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Illegally. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Yes. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Yes. So the point is that I get information 

from the media, for example, Twitter or certain web pages. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Yes. 

Ms. PACHECO. I want to point out that a state channel Diosdado 

Cabello, the person of the National Assembly, publishes personal 

information, altered, manipulated information that discloses certain limited communication between militants and opposition. 

Mr. DUNCAN. I think is important for the American people to 

hear. We take this for granted. I said it earlier, our access. 

Leopoldo, will he have any chance to have access to the press or 

to the Internet or any way to further his understanding of what is 

going on in the outside world? 

Ms. LO ́ PEZ VERMUT. No, he has limited access, arbitrary that is, 

to the TV. But again, the TV channels available are governmentrun so it is partial. 

One thing that I think for the American people to understand 

that information is known, I think that there is a lot of controversy 

as to how much governments listen in to citizens. That is a big 

topic of conversation. What I explain to people is most of the time, 

while you know that you might be listened to, you don’t fear for 

your life. What is going on in a place like Venezuela is that not 

only are you being listened to but that information is going to be 

used against you or your family for persecution all the way up to 

death. It is very different, that sense of fear for your life than just 

knowing that, you know, we are being listened to. We live in a different communication world. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Wow. Mr. Vecchio. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Another piece of this equation is that you 

have problem to get information from the media in Venezuela, but 

also you have problem to express your ideas. You don’t have channel to express your ideas. For example, Diosdado Cabello, he has 

a weekly TV program. In every program he attacks me, any time, 

any time so I don’t have the opportunity to respond to those attacks. So the Venezuelan people only get the information that 

Diosdado gives to the people of Venezuela. So I don’t have the opportunity to express my ideas and my opinion. So those windows 

are totally closed in Venezuela, you know. And when you put this 

in the context of an election, that is critical——

Mr. DUNCAN. Right. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI [continuing]. You know what I am saying, 

because I mean the electoral—the voters only will get one information——

81

Mr. DUNCAN. Yes, one side of the story. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. One side of the story. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Right. Right. Let me ask you this. You mentioned 

in your testimony about your constitutional rights and——

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Yes. 

Mr. DUNCAN [continuing]. You know, when Americans hear that, 

we think about our constitutional rights. But from what I understand about Venezuela, what good is the Constitution if the 

Maduro government is not following that, if you still don’t have a 

free judiciary? So talk a little bit more about what that Constitution may or may not mean today, November 2015. What is the Constitution? 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. The Constitution, I mean, is very wellwritten. The problem is the Maduro doesn’t comply with the Constitution. That is the deal. We have the separation of power in the 

Constitution, but in the practical point of view, they control all the 

powers in Venezuela. For example, in my case the only way to limit 

my political rights to run for office is through a final and enforceable criminal sentence. So that doesn’t occur in my case, and they 

disregard my candidacy. They cancel my candidacy and I didn’t 

have the opportunity even to defend my rights, to hear—I didn’t 

have the opportunity to give them my arguments. So the Constitution is there, but when you see it from the theoretical point of view, 

when you see the practice, they don’t comply with the letter of the 

Constitution. So that is the big problem. 

Mr. DUNCAN. So how do you change the judiciary with a strong 

authoritarian government like Maduro’s who ignores the Constitution? I mean truly the judiciary is your avenue of recourse. But if 

the judiciary is controlled and they ignore the Constitution—so I 

guess my question is how do you see a pathway to change? 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. That is why this election is quite important. The Supreme Court magistrates or judges are appointed by 

the National Assembly. So that will be a key element in order to 

have an impartial judicial branch. So that is quite important. And 

then also the electoral branch is appointed so the National Assembly——

Mr. DUNCAN. How many assemblymen are up for reelection? 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. What? 

Mr. DUNCAN. In the Congress, how many assemblymen——

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Five years and you can be reelected. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Are some of them up for reelection this year? 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Yes. For example, Diosdado Cabello, I was 

competing against Diosdado, and I don’t have any doubt that he 

gave an order to the electoral branch to cancel my candidacy. He 

didn’t want to run against me. So he controlled that, that piece of 

the equation. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Wow. Wow. I mean rule of law is so important. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Yes. And I also want to point out that the 

sentence against Leopoldo is not only against Leopoldo. We have to 

be very careful on that. It is against any Venezuelan who thinks 

different from the government. 

Ms. LO ́ PEZ VERMUT. Well, it is important if you read Leopoldo’s 

sentence, the language that is used explains—sorry, describes that 

Leopoldo had a machinery, Leopoldo is the intellectual actor who 

82

was using his messaging to make—he was the determiner using a 

criminal organization. So by putting in a sentence that the political 

party that he runs is actually a criminal organization, effectively, 

the state is criminalizing political parties and difference of opinion. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Ms. Pacheco, in your written statement and in your 

verbal statement you said in Venezuela there are systematic and 

generalized attacks against people who dare express ideas and 

thoughts of disagreement or critics toward the government. What 

impact do you think the December 6 elections will have on this culture of fear? 

Ms. PACHECO. The thing is that the regime is betting to violence. 

And this is a scary scenario because this is a political circumstance 

in which they internally—and when I say internally, they, the government—they are against each other. They are not against each 

other on an ethical basis or problem but it is so because they dispute the power. They are playing against the power. This sentence 

can sound very terrible. 

And the image is that of a country by which the criminal groups 

want to remain in power, and of course, then they appeal to any 

necessary—whatever is necessary of course out of the law, without 

forgetting that the power currently has been inherited from the 

government of Chavez. They are the military. And the military are, 

at least it has been demonstrated by way of the investigations, well 

advanced and they are compromised. They are involved with the 

cartel of the narco trafficking. And since they are going to defend 

their business, seeing their power diminished, as a danger they can 

recourse to repression and power that they did so already in 2014, 

and of which we have Leopoldo Lo ́pez, the symbol of injustice because of a peaceful rally and protest. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Wow. Okay. Last question, how are the sanctions 

working that the U.S. has imposed on Venezuela? And that is to 

all the panelists. Are the sanctions working? Can the U.S. do more? 

What is the effect it is having in Venezuela? I will start with Mr. 

Vecchio. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Yes. I would say yes, they have been working well, but you cannot take this action isolated. It is not a silver 

bullet. I think you have to combine with a holistic strategy in order 

to approach the Venezuelan problem. For example, as I said, working with government in Latin America to support, for example, a 

hearing like this to show what is really happening in Venezuela, 

working with those governments in multilateral organizations such 

as U.N. in order to ask for the compliance of the resolution who 

have asked for the release of political prisoners. So it is not alone. 

One measure will not help you to support our struggle to restore 

democracy in Venezuela. So if you are only taking consideration of 

that action, it won’t be enough. You know what I am saying? So 

I think it should be part of a holistic strategy with different governments and at the same time multilateral——

Mr. DUNCAN. Sanctions——

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI [continuing]. Organizations——

Mr. DUNCAN [continuing]. Alone won’t work? 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. What? 

Mr. DUNCAN. Sanctions alone won’t work is what you are saying? 

83

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. I think they have to be combined with 

other measures, yes. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Yes. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. And let me add this. Probably you won’t 

see an immediate result, but that is causing a concern on the 

media officers in Venezuela saying I don’t want to follow the top 

officers in Venezuela putting us in a problem around the world and 

especially with the violation of human rights. So now I need to be 

aware of this. You know, that is also a message that the media officers and the administration is taking in consideration in order to 

take decisions. Okay? 

Ms. LO ́ PEZ VERMUT. I think the message was very clear, and I 

think it was successful to an extent. I agree with Carlos in what 

he said. I think that when you see people leaving the country and 

coming to the United States willing to give information in exchange 

for something, it means that they are afraid. 

To me as an American citizen, the most valuable lesson of the 

sanctions is understanding that it is not right to use American soil, 

American systems, financial organizations to wash your hands 

when you have blood on your hands in another country. I think 

that is a really powerful message, and I do think strongly that people within the regime think about that. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Right. Right. 

Mr. VECCHIO DEMARI. Just let me add just a short sentence 

which is very important, something that you could do. We understand there is an ongoing investigation from the U.S. authorities 

against top Venezuelan officers, for example, Diosdado Cabello and 

others regarding drug trafficking and money laundering. We need 

to know who they are. We need to know the status of that investigation. That is quite important. And also, we need to see, although I understand that you have a legal procedure to follow, but 

we need to see the evidence that supports those investigations. 

That will help us to show to the Venezuelans who really are in 

power right now. 

Mr. DUNCAN. That is interesting. So, Ms. Pacheco? 

Ms. PACHECO. If you ask me about honesty, and I will do so, that 

the idea initially is a good basis, and the initiative, that probably 

the idea of having it work on some Venezuelan officers are used by 

the government of Maduro, Maduro’s regime for their own benefit 

in Venezuela, within Venezuela. And the polarization between the 

nationalism and if we do not move from words into action to the 

next step, nothing concrete will be obtained. 

Personally, I believe that there is sufficient evidence that there 

is evidence of high top officers of the regime, the government, the 

Venezuelan regime involved in the violation of human rights, in 

narco trafficking and money laundering, and in a whole bunch of 

crimes that they even carry out here. And that at the end of the 

day we have not seen serious decisions with that regard. 

Mr. DUNCAN. Thank you. I hate to do it, but we are going to have 

to wrap up. I want to thank the witnesses on panel II for your 

bravery and your courage that you have shown here just by testifying today. The courage that you have shown is not forgotten. 

Pursuant to the committee rule 7, the members of our subcommittee be permitted to submit written statements be included 

84

in the official hearing record. And without objection, the hearing 

record will remain open for 5 business days to allow statements, 

questions, extraneous materials for the record subject to the length 

limitation to the rules. 

And there being no further business, this committee will stand 

adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:56 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(85)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

86

f


97464n.eps
87

f


97464m.eps
88

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE JEFF DUNCAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, AND CHAIRMAN, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE


97464f-1.eps
89

f


97464f-2.eps
90

STATEMENT SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY MR. CARLOS VECCHIO DEMARI, LAWYER, 

NATIONAL POLITICAL COORDINATOR, VOLUNTAD POPULAR


97464g-1.eps
91


97464g-2.eps
92


97464g-3.eps
93


97464g-4.eps
94


97464g-5.eps
95


97464g-6.eps
96

Æ


97464g-7.eps