Venezuela approves amnesty that may free opponents; critics say it falls short of justice
.jpg "Lawmakers of Venezuela's National Assembly vote during a debate on an amnesty bill proposed by Venezuela's interim president Delcy Rodriguez at the National Assembly in Caracas on February 19, 2026. Venezuela's Parliament unanimously approved on February 19 a historic amnesty law that is expected to lead to the release of hundreds of political prisoners after 27 years of Chavismo.")
Venezuela’s socialist regime pushed through a sweeping amnesty law late Thursday that could free hundreds of political prisoners and reshape the country’s fragile transition after strongman Nicolás Maduro’s capture — but critics warn the measure excludes key opponents.
Lawmakers in the Chavista-controlled National Assembly unanimously approved the legislation, article by article, late Thursday night. “The amnesty law for democratic coexistence is hereby enacted,” Assembly leader Jorge Rodríguez announced at the close of the session, framing the measure as a step toward national reconciliation after years of political conflict.
The measure was signed into law late Thursday by Rodríguez’s sister, interim President Delcy Rodríguez, who promoted the initiative after assuming power following Maduro’s capture during a Jan. 3 U.S. military operation. She called for authorities to move quickly to implement it.
Under the legislation, courts must issue rulings on amnesty requests within 15 days, while a special commission will review cases not explicitly covered by the new law.
Families wait outside prisons
The vote comes after weeks of mounting expectations among families of detainees, many of whom have gathered outside prisons across the country awaiting news of their loved ones.
Outside El Helicoide prison — long seen as a symbol of state repression and recently ordered shut down by the interim government — relatives followed the parliamentary debate on their cell phones, caught between hope and exhaustion. One woman stood silently with tears streaming down her face while another whispered prayers as lawmakers debated the measure.
Since the government began a release process on Jan. 8, the prisoner-advocacy group Foro Penal says 448 opposition members have been granted conditional release, while 644 people remain behind bars.
Key exclusions raise concerns
Despite the government’s portrayal of the measure as historic, human-rights groups say its scope is limited and could leave a significant number of prisoners without relief. Foro Penal, which keeps tabs on imprisoned dissidents and regime opponents, estimates that nearly 400 detainees will not benefit, noting the law covers only a 13-year period of the 27 years of Chavismo.
The legislation excludes people accused of involvement in military rebellions or coups, as well as those charged with serious crimes such as human-rights violations, intentional homicide, drug trafficking and corruption. Critics also point to a controversial provision — quickly dubbed the “María Corina Machado article” — that bars individuals who allegedly called for sanctions or foreign intervention, potentially preventing the opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize laureate from receiving amnesty.
Article 7 requires beneficiaries to be “in compliance with the law” or submit to it after it takes effect, a provision critics say could force opponents to acknowledge charges they consider politically motivated.
Analysts, rights advocates weigh in
Venezuelan political analyst and columnist Alejandro Hernández described the legislation as a partial measure that provides relief to some detainees but falls short of a comprehensive amnesty.
“I think it’s a middle ground,” Hernández said. “It will help an important group of people who never should have faced criminal charges, but it leaves out key sectors.”
He pointed to the exclusion of military officers detained on conspiracy accusations and prominent political leaders in exile, noting that even lawmakers aligned with the opposition have described the measure as a first step rather than a definitive solution.
Hernández also said the law does not take effect automatically, requiring individuals to petition courts to formalize their pardon. “We are talking about people who never committed a crime,” he said.
Carlos Lusverti, director of the human rights center at Andrés Bello Catholic University in Venezuela, called the legislation a missed opportunity to create a more comprehensive framework that would include all political prisoners.
“The positive aspect is that it benefits hundreds of people who remain imprisoned, those who have already been released and even some who are in exile,” Lusverti told the Miami Herald. “But it is a missed opportunity to create a more complete norm.”
He said the measure was debated in an opaque and rushed process, with limited consultation with victims and families, which “did not help to care for or contribute to healing the wounds” caused by years of political imprisonment.
Lusverti added that the list of beneficiaries fails to cover key periods of arbitrary detentions, including cases between 2020 and 2024, and raised concerns that the same courts that ordered the imprisonments are now responsible for administering the amnesty.
“There is a lack of independence of the same judiciary to which this process is assigned,” he said.
He also warned that provisions eliminating criminal files could undermine future investigations into alleged abuses. “They are key elements for investigations into possible cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, as well as torture,” he said.
Opposition, exile leaders push back
José Antonio Colina, president of the Miami-based exiled organization Veppex, said the law leaves military personnel — one of the largest groups of political detainees — largely unprotected.
“This amnesty law unfortunately does not cover military members who are political prisoners or those forced into exile,” Colina said, noting that many have been charged with rebellion, conspiracy or terrorism, often without evidence.
He argued the measure creates the appearance of responding to international pressure without making meaningful concessions.
Antonio Ledezma, the former Caracas metropolitan mayor living in exile in Madrid, said individual U.S. sanctions imposed by Washington on regime officials accused of corruption, drug trafficking or undermining the country’s democratic system should remain in place despite the law’s approval.
“I believe those sanctions remain in force until justice is ultimately served, because what cannot happen again in Venezuela is persecution for dissent,” Ledezma said.
Human rights advocates and relatives of detainees also expressed skepticism about whether the measure can lead to genuine reconciliation.
Andreína Baduel, coordinator of the Venezuela-based Committee for the Liberation of Political Prisoners, aid the law fails to provide guarantees of justice or reparations and warned that dozens of detainees in critical health conditions could remain behind bars because they are accused of conspiracies.
Juan Pablo Guanipa, a close ally of Machado who was recently released after a brief return to detention, described the legislation as insufficient and warned it could be used to pressure opponents.
Former opposition lawmaker Delsa Solórzano said the exclusions are troubling and argued the measure does not dismantle legal tools used for political persecution.
Taken together, the reactions highlight a broad consensus among critics that while the law could bring relief to hundreds of detainees, it stops short of a full political reset. Analysts, human rights advocates and opposition figures say the exclusions — particularly of military prisoners and exiled leaders — along with the central role of courts accused of lacking independence, risk undermining the measure’s legitimacy and limiting its ability to deliver the reconciliation the government says it seeks.
A fragile step, a tense transition
Chavista leaders, however, insist the measure represents a turning point after years of polarization and conflict.
Rodríguez told lawmakers that painful events had forced the country to seek unity.
“The only thing I regret is that such lamentable and catastrophic events had to occur for all of us to seek and promote brotherhood, unity and peace in the republic,” he said. “One also learns from pain, and from this pain we are beginning a process in which we must persevere.”
The government argues the law will help stabilize the country during the political transition now under way.
Whether the amnesty ultimately eases tensions or deepens divisions may depend on how broadly it is applied — and whether excluded prisoners eventually receive relief.
For families waiting outside prison gates, the debate is less about politics than about reunions long delayed.
As courts begin reviewing cases in the coming days, Venezuela faces a delicate test: whether a law billed as a step toward peace can bridge a deep legacy of mistrust, or reinforce the fractures it aims to heal.
