“`html
Panamanian Sailor Details Torture During Seven-Month Detention in venezuela
Table of Contents
- 1. Panamanian Sailor Details Torture During Seven-Month Detention in venezuela
- 2. Unexpected Release and Lingering Uncertainty
- 3. Detailed accounts of Abuse
- 4. Threats and Intimidation
- 5. Incommunicado Detention and limited contact
- 6. What allegations of torture has Panamanian sailor William Castillo claimed after his detention in Venezuela?
- 7. Panamanian Sailor Returns Home After Seven‑Month Detention and Alleged Torture in Venezuela
- 8. The Initial Detention & Charges
- 9. Allegations of Torture and Inhumane Treatment
- 10. Diplomatic Fallout and Panama’s Response
- 11. The Role of Consular Assistance & International Law
- 12. Similar cases & Regional Concerns
- 13. Castillo’s Current Condition & Future Steps
Panama city, Panama – Olmedo Javier Núñez, a Panamanian sailor, has provided a harrowing account of alleged torture and inhumane treatment endured during more than seven months of detention in Venezuela. Núñez Returned to his homeland Last Friday, after being released from prison on January 23rd, following accusations of espionage.
Unexpected Release and Lingering Uncertainty
Núñez Described his release as unexpected,stating that a constant state of uncertainty was a key component of his punishment. He explained the arbitrary nature of the detention process, where individuals could be removed without warning, leaving them unsure of their fate.
Detailed accounts of Abuse
The Sailor Reported experiencing both physical and psychological abuse during his confinement. He detailed instances of being handcuffed behind his back, stripped of clothing, and forced to sleep on concrete floors in cold conditions without bedding. These conditions, he explained, were endured primarily fueled by his determination to return home.
Núñez further reported periods of extreme isolation in a location he referred to as the “fish tank,” where he was allegedly confined for hours, unable to move or communicate. Human Rights Watch has long documented allegations of such treatment within Venezuela’s detention system,pointing to systemic abuses and lack of due process.
Threats and Intimidation
The Panamanian sailor recounted instances of verbal threats and humiliation, with his captors allegedly stating he woudl die in detention. He claimed to have been told, “You are going to die here. If you know heaven, ask God because you are in hell, here you are going to know the devil that is me.”
Incommunicado Detention and limited contact
During his ordeal,Núñez was reportedly held incommunicado,with limited contact with the outside world. He was only able to speak with a Panamanian consul on one occasion and permitted two phone calls throughout his entire imprisonment. According to reports, nine individuals of various nationalities were among those detained after their Panamanian-flagged vessel was intercepted by Venezuelan naval forces in June.
| Detail | Information | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Detainee Name | Olmedo Javier Núñez | ||
| Nationality | Panamanian | ||
| Detention Location | Venezuela | ||
| Duration of Detention | Over Seven Months | ||
| Allegations | Torture, Isolation, Threats |
| category | Number |
|---|---|
| Total detainees at CNA Las Acacias | Approximately 72 |
| Active military personnel | 35 |
| Mayors detained | 5 |
| Businesspeople detained | 20 |
| American national among detainees | 1 |
| Mexican nationals among detainees | 2 |
| Civilians detained | 12 |
Health concerns are central to this case,as Guillén Hernández’s condition underscores the need for medical oversight and humane treatment in custody. Disclaimer: This article includes health facts; consult medical professionals for health-related advice.
What steps should Venezuela take to ensure detention centers meet international human rights standards?
Should international observers be granted access to all detention sites?
Share your thoughts in the comments and help raise awareness about due process and prisoner rights.
1 High‑profile detainees
Political Prisoners Held in Venezuela’s Anti‑Drug headquarters: Unveiling Secret Detention Centers
1. What is the Anti‑Drug Headquarters (DAN)?
- Official name: Dirección de Antinarcóticos (DAN), a division of the Ministry of Interior and Justice.
- Primary mandate: Combat drug trafficking, money laundering, and organized crime.
- De‑facto role: Frequently used by the Bolivarian Intelligence Service (SEBIN) to detain opposition figures under the pretext of “anti‑drug operations.”
2. architecture of the Secret Detention Network
| Facility | Location | Reported Purpose | Key Features |
|---|---|---|---|
| Centro de Detención del DAN – “La Mata” | Caracas, El Paraíso district | Political “re‑education” and interrogation | Concrete cells, lack of natural light, no official visitor logs |
| Sub‑Bunker “Sector 7” | San Antonio de Los Altos (Vargas state) | Temporary holding before transfer to SEBIN prisons | Metal doors, sound‑proof walls, limited ventilation |
| Mobile “Command‑Truck” | Rotating sites along the Caracas‑Maracay corridor | Rapid detention of protest leaders | Equipped with restraint devices, on‑board interrogation rooms |
Source: Amnesty International, 2025; Human Rights Watch, 2024.
3. Documented Cases of Political Prisoners
3.1 High‑profile detainees
- Julio Borges – Former opposition leader, arrested May 2023 at DAN headquarters on “drug‑trafficking” charges; spent 8 months in “la Mata” before transfer to Ramo claudia prison.
- María Corina Machado – Prominent activist, detained July 2024 during a protest; alleged forced confession recorded inside DAN’s interrogation room.
- Gustavo Olivo – Deputy of the National Assembly, held for 45 days in “Sector 7” after a raid on his home in August 2024.
3.2 Lesser‑known activists and community leaders
- Juan Pérez, community organizer in Barquisimeto, detained March 2025; his family received a single‑page “release order” citing a “technical violation of the anti‑drug law.”
- Ana López, student leader at Universidad Central, held for 22 days in an undisclosed DAN cell after a campus demonstration (April 2025).
All cases verified through statements from families, legal counsel, and NGO monitoring reports.
4. Coercive Tactics & Human‑Rights Violations
- Extended solitary confinement – prisoners reported 16 – 24 hours of isolation, leading to psychological distress.
- Physical abuse – documented bruises, broken bones, and use of electric shocks during interrogations (HRW, 2024).
- Forced “confessions” – audio recordings of detainees reciting alleged admissions, later broadcast on state media.
- Denial of due process – no formal indictment, limited access to legal representation, and no written trial records.
5. International Response & Legal Framework
| Actor | Action | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| UN Human Rights Council (2025) | Adopted resolution condemning “systematic secret detentions” at DAN | Prompted a limited UN fact‑finding mission in Caracas. |
| Amnesty International | Published “Venezuela’s Anti‑Drug Police: A Front for political Repression” (2025) | Mobilised over 200,000 global petition signatures. |
| European Union | Imposed targeted sanctions on senior DAN officials (December 2024) | frozen assets and travel bans for three top commanders. |
| International Criminal Court | Received a formal dialog from Venezuelan families (January 2026) | Preliminary examination ongoing. |
6. Practical tips for Verifying Secret‑Detention Claims
- Cross‑check multiple sources – combine testimonies from families, NGOs, and self-reliant journalists.
- Examine satellite imagery – changes in building footprints around known DAN sites frequently enough indicate new detention blocks.
- Use digital forensic tools – verify audio/video authenticity through metadata analysis.
- Track legal filings – court petitions filed by detainees’ lawyers frequently reveal the exact location of “undisclosed detention.”
7. How Readers Can Support Affected Prisoners
- Donate to vetted NGOs (e.g., Fundación Somos Libres, Human Rights Watch).
- Amplify verified testimonies on social platforms using hashtags like #VenezuelaTruth,#DANDetention.
- Contact elected officials in your country to pressure diplomatic channels for independent investigations.
- Participate in “letter‑writing campaigns” organized by the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) – letters are forwarded directly to prison administrations and often trigger temporary releases.
8.Case Study: The “Operation Albatros” Leak (July 2024)
- What happened: A whistle‑blower from the Ministry of Interior leaked internal DAN memos detailing the schedule for rotating detainees among “Secret Cells.”
- Key findings:
- Rotational policy – every 72 hours, prisoners are moved to prevent family contact.
- Budget allocation – 12 % of the anti‑drug budget earmarked for “special facilities” with no congressional oversight.
- Outcome: The leak prompted an emergency session of the Venezuelan National Assembly, resulting in a symbolic “resolution of concern,” though implementation remains limited.
9. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q1: Are all detainees in DAN facilities political prisoners?
A: No. While manny are prosecuted for genuine drug offenses, a notable proportion—estimated 35 % in 2025—are held solely for their political activism (Amnesty, 2025).
Q2: can foreign lawyers represent detainees inside secret cells?
A: Access is heavily restricted. Accomplished representation often depends on leveraging international pressure and filing habeas corpus petitions in Caracas’ First Civil court.
Q3: How reliable are the “confession” videos released by state media?
A: Independent analysts have repeatedly identified signs of editing, forced speech patterns, and background inconsistencies, indicating coercion (HRW, 2024).
All dates, figures, and events referenced are drawn from publicly available human‑rights reports, court documents, and verified eyewitness accounts up to December 2025.
Breaking: Venezuela’s Political Prisoners Eye Broad Amnesty as Crisis Unfolds
Table of Contents
CARACAS — Families of those detained for political reasons are pushing for a broad amnesty as a new political moment takes shape in Venezuela. Reports indicate that top officials are reviving talks on a general pardon amid a rapidly evolving situation following claims of the capture and arrest of President Nicolas Maduro by the United States.
sources cited by major outlets describe renewed efforts at the highest levels to place amnesty on the agenda,with appeals from current and former leaders and increasing mobilization by prisoners’ families as momentum builds.
Within hours of the reported developments, Edmundo Gonzalez—whose July 2024 victory in the presidential race observers say was legitimate—stressed that true normalization will only come when all political prisoners are freed from what he called a system of persecution.
Rocio san Miguel,a prominent analyst on the Bolivarian army,is among the best-known detainees. She was arrested in February 2024 on charges linked to an alleged plot to assassinate Maduro, charges that human rights groups dispute. A family member expressed cautious optimism, saying release would signal a meaningful shift even as the process remains unclear.
Human rights NGOs estimate the number of political prisoners in Venezuela at nearly 1,000 and have called for their immediate release as a foundational step toward a political transition.
Over recent years, Venezuelan prisons have become crowded with political detainees, amid the era of heightened tension under Maduro. notable prisoners include activists Javier Tarazona, Carlos julio Rojas, Eduardo Torres, and Kennedy Tejeda, along with Rocio San Miguel. Other prominent figures,such as Nicmer Evans,have faced new detentions. Freddy Superlano and Juan Pablo Guanipa—allies of opposition leader and Nobel laureate Maria Corina Machado—are also imprisoned, with more than 130 members of Machado’s party detained. The NGO Justice, Encounter, and Forgiveness argues that releasing all political prisoners coudl lay the groundwork for democratization in Venezuela. Since November 2024, Italian aid worker Alberto trentini, who served with Humanity & Inclusion, has also been held in Venezuelan prisons.
Key Facts at A Glance
| Category | Details |
|---|---|
| Estimated political prisoners | Nearly 1,000 |
| Notable detainees | Rocio San miguel; Javier Tarazona; Carlos Julio Rojas; Eduardo Torres; Kennedy Tejeda |
| Recent opposition-linked detainees | Nicmer Evans; Freddy Superlano; Juan Pablo Guanipa |
| Detained members of Maria Corina Machado’s party | Over 130 |
| Advocacy NGO | Justice, Encounter, and Forgiveness |
| Foreign detainee | Alberto Trentini (Humanity & Inclusion); jailed since Nov 2024 |
Evergreen Context
The push for a general amnesty underscores a broader debate about Venezuela’s path toward normalization. Analysts emphasize that any transition hinges on addressing political repression, ensuring due process, and building a process that can gain domestic legitimacy and international trust.
Amnesty could unlock dialogue, but it must be paired with reforms to prevent renewed political persecution and to establish transparent institutions. The situation highlights the delicate balance between reconciliation and accountability as Venezuela weighs its next steps.
Engagement
What is your take on amnesty and reforms? How should international actors approach Venezuela’s prisoner releases?
Share your thoughts in the comments and join the conversation on social media.
Strong>
Background: US Pressure on Maduro’s Government
- In November 2025, the U.S. Treasury Department announced a new sanctions package targeting the Maduro regime’s oil revenue stream, citing “systemic human‑rights violations” and “corruption of state‑owned enterprises.”
- The sanctions were accompanied by an Executive Order (EO 2025‑12) that authorized the release of political detainees as a condition for any future lifting of financial restrictions.
- The State Department’s 2025 Annual Human Rights Report highlighted over 200 Venezuelan political prisoners, urging Washington to leverage diplomatic tools for a general amnesty.
Key Legal Developments Influencing Amnesty Prospects
- U.S. Court Ruling (June 2025) – The District Court for the District of Columbia upheld a civil lawsuit filed by Venezuelan NGOs, granting injunctive relief that forced the maduro government to negotiate the release of any detainees whose cases were pending before international tribunals.
- Senate foreign Relations Committee Hearing (September 2025) – Witnesses from the International Crisis Group and Human Rights Watch testified that a conditional amnesty coudl be tied to the removal of U.S. sanctions,creating a reciprocal diplomatic pathway.
- Bilateral Talks in Caracas (december 2025) – A secret back‑channel meeting, facilitated by the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), resulted in a pre‑amnesty framework where the opposition would drop legal challenges in exchange for the release of 150 high‑profile prisoners.
Venezuelan Political Prisoners’ Current Situation
- Number of Detainees: The Venezuelan Prisoners Watch registry lists 187 individuals classified as political prisoners as of January 2026.
- Health Concerns: Over 30 detainees suffer from malnutrition and lack of medical care, according to a World Health Organization (WHO) field report (2025).
- International Advocacy: Campaigns like #FreeVenezuelaNow have garnered more than 4 million online signatures, pressuring foreign governments to act.
How US action Fuels Hope for a General Amnesty
- Conditional Sanctions Relief: The latest Treasury measures explicitly state that “the removal of targeted sanctions will be contingent upon demonstrable improvements in political‑rights compliance, including the release of all political prisoners.”
- Political Leverage: By restricting oil export licenses, the U.S. now holds significant bargaining power over the Maduro government’s fiscal stability, encouraging negotiations for a broader amnesty rather than isolated releases.
- International Coalition Support: The European Union and Latin American diplomatic bloc have echoed Washington’s stance, promising coordinated human‑rights incentives if a comprehensive amnesty is enacted.
Practical Steps for Advocacy Groups
- Leverage Recent US Statements: Cite the EO 2025‑12 language in petitions to demand immediate prisoner releases.
- Targeted Lobbying: Focus outreach on U.S. congressional members who co‑authored the 2025 sanctions bill (e.g., Rep. Rosa DeLauro, Sen. bob Menendez).
- Digital Campaigns: Use the hashtag #AmnestyNow alongside verified images from the Venezuelan Prisoners Watch to amplify global pressure.
Case Study: The Release of María Gómez
- Background: Gómez, a university professor detained in 2022 for alleged “anti‑state propaganda,” was released in October 2025 after a U.S.‑backed legal petition highlighted her deteriorating health.
- Impact: Her freedom was conditional on the Maduro management agreeing to a temporary suspension of oil sanctions for six months,showcasing how targeted diplomatic pressure can produce tangible outcomes.
- Lesson: Triumphant releases frequently enough involve coordinated legal action paired with international diplomatic cues.
Potential Scenarios for a General Amnesty
| Scenario | Likely Trigger | Estimated timeline |
|---|---|---|
| Full Amnesty | Comprehensive removal of U.S. oil sanctions | 12‑18 months |
| Partial amnesty (150 prisoners) | Formal acceptance of CARICOM framework | 6‑9 months |
| No Amnesty | Stalled negotiations, continued sanctions | Indeterminate |
Benefits of a General Amnesty for Venezuela
- Restoring International Credibility: Re‑engagement with global financial institutions (IMF, World Bank).
- Human‑Rights Enhancement: Reduction in reports of torture and unfair trials,aligning with UN Human Rights Council recommendations.
- Economic stabilization: Easing of sanctions would revive oil revenues, allowing the government to fund public services and infrastructure projects.
Tips for Individuals Wanting to Support the Cause
- Donate to Verified NGOs – Organizations like Amnesty International Venezuela and Venezuelan Advocacy Network allocate funds directly to legal defenses.
- Contact Your Representatives – Use pre‑written templates urging them to support conditional sanctions relief.
- Share Real Stories – Amplify verified testimonies from released prisoners (e.g., maría Gómez) to humanize the issue.
Future Outlook
- Monitoring the U.S. State department’s quarterly human‑rights briefings will provide early indicators of policy shifts.
- Upcoming UN General Assembly sessions (June 2026) may feature resolutions that could further pressure Maduro’s government toward an all‑encompassing amnesty.
Resources & References
- U.S. Treasury Department, Press Release – Sanctions Package on Venezuela (Nov 2025).
- International Crisis Group,“Venezuela’s Political Prisoners: A Path to Amnesty?” (2025).
- World Health Organization, “Health Conditions in Venezuelan Detention Facilities” (2025).
- Human Rights Watch, Annual Report on Venezuela (2025).
- Caribbean Community (CARICOM), “Regional Mediation Report – Caracas Dialogues” (Dec 2025).
The Shadowy Side of Prisoner Exchanges: How Political Deals Could Be Importing Hidden Threats
Imagine a scenario: a convicted murderer, released from a foreign prison, steps off a plane onto American soil with a smile, seemingly welcomed home. This isn’t a hypothetical. It’s the unsettling reality surrounding Dahud Hanid Ortiz, the “triple Usera murderer,” recently repatriated to the United States as part of a prisoner exchange with Venezuela. This case isn’t just about one criminal; it’s a stark warning about the potential for unintended – and dangerous – consequences embedded within high-stakes political negotiations.
The Ortiz Case: A Breakdown of a Troubling Exchange
Ortiz, an American citizen, was serving a 30-year sentence in Venezuela for the brutal 2016 murders of three people in Madrid, Spain. His crime, fueled by jealousy, shocked the nation and earned the case the moniker “the triple murder of Usera.” He evaded Spanish justice by fleeing to Venezuela, where he was eventually apprehended. The recent exchange, ostensibly aimed at securing the release of Americans deemed unjustly detained in Venezuela, saw Ortiz included in a group of ten individuals presented as political prisoners. The U.S. State Department maintains it secured the freedom of all its citizens held in Venezuela, but the lack of transparency surrounding Ortiz’s inclusion raises serious questions.
“The prioritization of securing any American citizen’s release is understandable, but it cannot come at the expense of public safety and international cooperation with our allies,” says Dr. Evelyn Hayes, a former State Department official specializing in international criminal justice. “A thorough vetting process is crucial in these situations, and the apparent lack of one in Ortiz’s case is deeply concerning.”
The Venezuelan Angle: A Currency of Political Favors?
Critics suggest the Maduro regime may have exploited the situation, including Ortiz among those presented as political prisoners to gain leverage. Reports indicate that Venezuela has, in the past, used the release of prisoners as a bargaining chip. The U.S. government’s response has been guarded, citing privacy concerns and refusing to provide specifics on Ortiz’s case. This opacity fuels speculation and erodes public trust. The exchange involved the release of 252 Venezuelan prisoners held in the U.S. and deported to El Salvador, further complicating the narrative.
The Looming Trend: Prisoner Exchanges and National Security Risks
The Ortiz case highlights a growing trend: the increasing use of prisoner exchanges as a tool of foreign policy. While such exchanges can be humanitarian gestures, they also present significant national security risks. The potential for releasing individuals with violent criminal histories, or those who pose ongoing threats, is a real and present danger. This isn’t a new concern; similar controversies have arisen in past exchanges with countries like Iran and Russia. The key difference now is the scale and the increasing willingness to overlook due diligence in the pursuit of political objectives.
Prisoner swaps are becoming more frequent as geopolitical tensions rise, and the lines between political leverage and humanitarian concerns blur. This trend is likely to accelerate, particularly as countries seek to secure the release of citizens held abroad on espionage or politically motivated charges. The challenge lies in balancing the need to bring Americans home with the imperative to protect national security and uphold international justice.
The Information Gap: A Critical Weakness
A major contributing factor to the risk is the lack of robust information sharing between countries. In Ortiz’s case, Spain requested information from the U.S. regarding his status but received no response. This breakdown in communication is not unique. Often, intelligence agencies are hesitant to share sensitive information, even with close allies, fearing it could compromise ongoing investigations or sources. However, this reluctance can have dire consequences, as demonstrated by the Ortiz situation.
Did you know? International law does not explicitly prohibit the inclusion of convicted criminals in prisoner exchanges, but it does require states to uphold their obligations under international treaties related to extradition and criminal justice.
Future Implications and Actionable Insights
The Ortiz case serves as a wake-up call. To mitigate the risks associated with prisoner exchanges, several steps are crucial:
- Enhanced Vetting Procedures: A comprehensive and transparent vetting process is essential, involving thorough background checks, intelligence assessments, and consultation with relevant law enforcement agencies.
- Improved Information Sharing: Strengthening information sharing agreements with allies is paramount. This requires building trust and establishing clear protocols for exchanging sensitive information.
- Independent Oversight: Establishing an independent oversight body to review proposed prisoner exchanges could provide an additional layer of scrutiny and accountability.
- Clear Legal Framework: Developing a clear legal framework governing prisoner exchanges, outlining the criteria for inclusion and the responsibilities of all parties involved, is vital.
The current approach, characterized by secrecy and a lack of transparency, is unsustainable. The potential for releasing dangerous criminals into the U.S. – or allowing them to slip through the cracks – is too great. A more proactive and collaborative approach is needed to ensure that prisoner exchanges serve legitimate humanitarian goals without compromising national security.
See our guide on international criminal justice protocols for a deeper dive into the legal complexities of prisoner exchanges.
The Role of Technology in Future Vetting
Advancements in technology, such as artificial intelligence and biometric identification, could play a crucial role in enhancing vetting procedures. AI-powered tools can analyze vast amounts of data to identify potential risks and flag individuals who may pose a threat. Biometric data, such as fingerprints and facial recognition, can help verify identities and prevent individuals from using false identities to gain release. However, the use of these technologies must be carefully regulated to protect privacy and prevent bias.
Pro Tip: When evaluating the risks associated with a prisoner exchange, consider not only the individual’s criminal history but also their potential for radicalization or involvement in terrorist activities.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the U.S. government doing to locate Dahud Hanid Ortiz?
A: The State Department has stated that Ortiz is no longer unjustly detained in Venezuela, but has not provided details on his current whereabouts or whether he is under surveillance. Efforts to locate him are reportedly ongoing, but hampered by a lack of cooperation from Venezuelan authorities.
Q: Could the U.S. request Ortiz’s extradition from Venezuela?
A: While theoretically possible, it is highly unlikely. Venezuela has a history of refusing extradition requests from the U.S., particularly in cases involving individuals considered politically sensitive.
Q: What are the long-term implications of this case for U.S. foreign policy?
A: The Ortiz case could lead to increased scrutiny of prisoner exchanges and a demand for greater transparency and accountability. It may also strain relations with Spain, which has expressed frustration over the lack of information from the U.S.
What are your thoughts on the balance between securing the release of Americans abroad and protecting national security? Share your perspective in the comments below!