martes, 23 de mayo de 2017


Following the recent ruling of the Argentine Supreme Court in the Muiña Case, reducing the prison sentence of an individual accused of crimes against humanity during the last military dictatorship, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights affirms that the Argentine Supreme Court is situated on a pathway of violation of human rights, since the consequences of that judgment generate an alarming sense of impunity in society. The Argentine Supreme Court made an incorrect jurisprudential interpretation based on penal guaranteeism, a doctrine that has been used in Argentina for the impunity of crimes of all types. After the intervention of the Vatican, in order to reduce the sentence of an individual convicted for crimes against humanity, the Argentine Supreme Court generates a sense of legal uncertainty, in addition to the fact that its jurisprudential argument uses an Argentine law that was repealed more than 16 years ago, which violates the principle of legality and also the principle of human rights progressivity, being the case of a legally regressive situation that makes no differentiatiation between minor crimes and crimes against humanity. For this reason, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights endorses the declaration of unconstitutionality made by judicial system of the province of San Juan, since reducing penalties for crimes against humanity violates the Argentine Constitution and the international pacts signed by the country. In addition, the judgment of the Supreme Court of Argentina uses an already repealed law that was neither in force during the commission of the crimes nor during their judgment, so it is a resource that is illegal, unconstitutional and contrary to human rights conventions, showing the pursuit for impunity to the hundreds of criminals sentenced for crimes against humanity, something that is perfectly evident in the fact that the Catholic Church called for a supposed reconciliation with these criminals only two days before the ruling of the Argentine Supreme Court. The possible criminal plot on the part of the Catholic Church and the Argentine Supreme Court lies in the fact that its judgment opens the door to the immediate release of others convicted for genocide and crimes against humanity, as is the case of former chaplain Von Wernich, who is the only condemned of the Catholic Church for these international crimes. This conspiracy between the Vatican and Argentine Supreme Court is also clear from the fact that the Argentine government does not seem to be behind this ruling, to which it has criticized as a regime of Impunity. In the past, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights has already denounced the Argentine judicial Power before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights for maintaining a regime of impunity facing the serious crimes suffered by the Maitriyana Buddhist community in said country, at the same time the Buddhist Tribunal sentenced the Argentine State for corruption and violation of human rights.
The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights validates the prevarication complaint made by lawyer Marcelo Parrilli and validates the imputation by prosecutor Marijuan against the three judges of the Argentine Supreme Court who issued the illegal sentence in favor of genocidal individuals for considering that this action violates the social contract and the national policy to prosecute, judge and sanction violations of human rights. Although Argentine lawyers often ignore this concept that in criminal cases judges can be held accountable for their actions, preferring instead to make complex and bureaucratic requests for impeachment, the Argentine Penal Code certainly allows denouncing judges for prevarication or for breaching their legal duty when they issue sentences that are contrary to the Law, although it is a resource that is almost never carried out by the complainants because of the system of impunity and ignorance ruling the Argentine judicial system.
The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights also validates the complaint lodged to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) by the constitutionalist Andrés Gil Domínguez against the Argentine State, since the judgment of the Argentine Supreme Court violated the rights of the victims that are explicit in the American Convention on Human Rights, and the Inter-American Convention on the Disappearance of Persons, not being in accordance with the Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity, nor with the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, as well as it is not in accordance with the own jurisprudences of the Inter-American Court and of the Argentine Supreme Court, breaching the international legal obligation that the Argentine State has to prosecute, judge and condemn those perpetrators of crimes against humanity. Even the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has questioned the judgment of the Argentine Supreme Court for carrying out an act of injustice when evaluating ordinary crimes and crimes against humanity in the same way, also breaching the International Law standards established in the Vienna Convention that prohibit invoking provisions of domestic Law as a justification to breach international obligations. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights recalls that the reparation of victims of international crimes is a fundamental human right that has been included in universal human rights treaties, so that the Argentine Supreme Court has a duty to protect it. In this sense, another recent ruling by the Argentine Supreme Court stated that claims for reparations for crimes against humanity are prescriptive, thus violating Argentina's international obligations signed in order to punish the criminals and simultaneously repair the damage caused on victims of international crimes.
As shown by the last Sentence of penalty reduction to those condemned for crimes against humanity, the Argentine Supreme Court decides not to comply with international human rights law, ignoring standards that are mandatory for the international community and acting in accordance with the shameful Denialism suffered by many government officials of President Macri. The international human rights instruments and ius cogens standards oblige States to struggle against impunity and appropriately punish those responsible for international crimes, so that amnesties, pardons or prescriptions of international crimes have been annulled when they are analyzed under international juridical entities, since they violate international norms that are hierarchically superior than local laws. The prosecution and conviction of international crimes must guarantee international standards and never aim at impunity. In this way, the guaranteeist orientation toward a reduction of sentences to those convicted for international crimes, in a social context that tends to the opposite pole of increasing penalties for ordinary crimes, is certainly a partial amnesty or undercovered pardon that violates International legal principles. Now, in the case of the International Criminal Court (ICC), there is undoubtedly a tendency for the guaranteeist paradigm for having sentenced those responsible for crimes against humanity to 20-year penalties, which demonstrates a humanist orientation that provides the possibility that, after having been in prison, in the future the criminal has the possibility of reintegrating into society. The great problem of the guaranteeism is that in Argentina it is usually applied grossly and to the detriment of the victims, being a distorted use of Law that undermines the social peace of the civil population.
The judgment of the Argentine Supreme Court in the Muiña Case was not the episode of illegality committed by such a court, for Deputy Carrió has submitted a request for political trial against the president of the Argentine Supreme Court for bad performance and eventual offences in the exercise of their functions by concentrating power and arbitrarily administering economic funds of the judicial system.
In previous cases, the Argentine Supreme Court has also issued judgments that violate human rights, as in a recent case where it decided that police have no collective right to unionize. Accordingly, in the Orellano Case, the Argentine Supreme Court limited the right to strike when endorsing the dismissal of an employee who participated in protests of a group that was not an officially registered union, thus denying the human right to strike and to social protest, which is not a right that belongs only to the powerful official unions. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights considers that said sentence is a legal aberration that restricts fundamental rights and freedoms, since the strike measures promoted by informal groups - or even by a single subject - are perfectly legitimate and legal. This judgment of the Argentine Supreme Court leaves in total lack of protection to the non-registered workers, who are non-formal employees and without union representation, reason why it is a step back in the process of union democratization. In addition, dismissing a worker for an act of strike constitutes a discriminatory measure. The Argentine Supreme Court also argued that direct action measures by employees are detrimental for the employer and the consumers, and therefore decided that the right to strike must be subordinate and not free. In a world where progresses on human rights were led by social activists who carried out methods of civil resistance and peaceful direct action, the judgment of the Argentine Supreme Court was an involution of Law, only contributing to the trade union bureaucracy and the repression of spontaneous social protest. Like the labor chamber member Arias Gibert, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights considers that said sentence seriously affects union freedom, being only similar to the legal position of the last Argentine military dictatorship that contradicted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
In the recent Case Fontevecchia and D'Amico, the Argentine Supreme Court took a new direction towards the violation of International Law by ruling that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights cannot revoke its sentences, which is clearly an unconstitutional sentence for violating international treaties Included in the National Constitution. In this unconstitutional sentence, the Argentine Supreme Court states that its judicial sentences cannot be revoked by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, despite the fact that its resolutions are binding for the Argentine State because the country has signed the American Convention on Human Rights. This position of the Argentine Supreme Court is quite similar to the position of the Venezuelan Supreme Court of Justice, which was sentenced by the Buddhist Tribunal, and it is also similar to the position of the Supreme Court of Russian Federation with respect to its attitude of non-compliance with the Rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. In this way, the Argentine Supreme Court is following in the footsteps of Venezuela and Russia, ignoring the duty to comply with International Law. The Supreme Court of Argentina cannot deny the Inter-American Court its role of final interpreter of the American Convention, generating a situation of vulnerability of the human right to resort to international instances and that the rulings in violation of law may be revoked. This Case Fontevecchia and D'Amico demonstrates that what happened in the Muiña Case, with the reduction of penalties for genocide criminals, was not a temporary departure from its jurisprudence, but rather it is part of an increasingly growing distance from the Inter-American system of Human Rights. When a State signs international treaties, a local court cannot claim to breach the international courts emanating from such treaties, because if it is done then the local court would proclaim itself as an authority that is independent of the State and to which its decisions cannot be reviewed. Indeed, every Supreme Court must be emancipated from the executive and legislative powers in order to maintain the republican order, but what it can never do is emancipate itself from the very State. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights agrees with the Argentine organization CELS (Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales or Center for Legal and Social Studies) in the fact that this sentence of the Argentine Supreme Court is seeking the country to be independent with regards to the International Human Rights Law.
Finally, with respect to the Case Comisario Derecho, which is less recent than the jurisprudence previously analyzed, the Supreme Court of Argentina ruled the legal prescription of criminal acts against someone accused for a crime of torture, by refusing to consider torture as an imprescriptible crime against humanity. In addition, the Argentine Supreme Court hinted that during democracy it would not be possible for crimes against humanity to exist - as stated by the executive power at that time - and even that police security forces would not be the State, nor they would be governmental organizations, thus dangerously suppressing the possibility that they may be accused of crimes against humanity. This constitutes a legal aberration that demonstrates absolute ignorance on both International Law as well as ignorance on the systematic and widespread tortures - and even assassinations - occurring in prisons and police stations in Argentina. In committing such a legal aberration, the Argentine Supreme Court deviated from the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which was developed in the Bulacio Case, where it was stated that the prescriptions or obstacles to prevent investigating or sanctioning those responsible for human rights violations are inadmissible. Although the rulings of the Inter-American Court are legally binding and mandatory, the Argentine Supreme Court disobeys the legal doctrine of the Inter-American Court, by arguing that torture in itself is not a crime against humanity, being a common offence rather than a human rights violation. The Argentine Supreme Court violates the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) because it considers that for torture to be considered a crime against humanity, it must be accompanied simultaneously by all other crimes against humanity, such as murders, deportations and abuses. Thus, by refusing to punish crimes against humanity individually, the Argentine Supreme Court shows an appalling ignorance of the International Human Rights Law. The Argentine Supreme Court has also decided to ignore that police torture in said country constitutes a widespread and systematic attack on civilians. Police torture is a widespread and not isolated attack because there are thousands of cases throughout the country, and there is a systematic pattern because the victims are almost all belonging to the poor social class. It is also possible to deduce the presence of a State policy that favors this repressive apparatus, even if it is not an explicit policy, since the permissiveness of the executive, legislative and judicial powers faced with the thousands of cases of police torture shows complicity by omission as form of State policy. Thus, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights condemns the Argentine Supreme Court as an institution that allows impunity of crimes against humanity.

The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights, by being mainly regulated by Buddhist Law, disagrees with the punitive orientation and the guaranteeist paradigm of Law because,  like Abolitionism, it raises the need to reformulate or to eradicate the penal system, considering that prisons do not meet the goals for which they are created. In fact, imprisonment for a convicted person does not lead to justice, but rather it is nothing more than a field that worsens the criminal's mind, rather than providing him/her with tools for his/her rehabilitation. Thus, following with abolitionist and restorative parameters, the Buddhist Law establishes that the prison system should be totally replaced by an educational and therapeutic system where the criminal is given the possibility to repair the damages caused to the victims, at the same time that the latter ones be given the opportunity for forgiveness. Being a system based on Tribal Law, the Buddhist Law considers that there are other creative ways of justice. A clear example emanated from the Case Argentina that was sentenced by the Buddhist Tribunal would be that in the face of a corrupt president, just like Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, an adequate sanction would not be a prison sentence but rather a work sentence, because for a billionaire politician who massively swindled the workers of the country the worst penalty would surely be to work as an ordinary person for about twelve hours per day at the minimum wage. Another creative way might be a confiscation of property sentence, in which any property of the accused as well as the property of all their relatives is removed, thus widely carrying out the principle of civil responsibility that is applied to parents when a child or a pet damages another person. Especially for the powerful people, poverty would be the worst of prisons. This perspective is a fast and concrete way in which most of the criminal crimes could be absorbed by the perspective of the Civil Right, resembling more to the system of justice that humanity originally had, since the prison system is a modern invention. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights recalls that justice is not associated with a punishment of suffering against the criminal, but rather with healing the suffering of the victims and relatives, so that the values of Truth, Memory, Forgiveness and Reconciliation must be properly employed. The prison sentence never leads to these spiritual values, but to resentment and hatred. True impunity does not imply that a criminal is not in prison, but rather that the victims are not heard, understood and helped to heal. It lacks any legal logic to focus the process of justice on punishment rather than focusing on reparation to victims and teaching the offenders. In this way, the approach of Buddhist Law fulfills the legal aim of seeking the most benign sanction. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights confirms two principles: first, international crimes should not be treated as ordinary crimes; secondly, the prison sentence is insufficient to put an end to injustice and impunity. Consequently, Justice should never lead to Prison, but to the Liberation of humanity, always acting in harmony with the principles of equality and fraternity. The only effective way of not resembling criminals is the strict compliance with ethical values, which are above the Rule of Law, since the laws of certain countries have many times led to aberrant decisions. Prison is a mechanism that enshrines impunity, so even the worst criminals should be rehabilitated and put to work for the benefit of all humanity and the Mother Earth. The Buddhist Law chooses ethical principles and a superior form of legality as a way to build a new human being, acting in defense of free life and democratic values. The defense of human rights is the center of the Discourse of Buddhist Law, positioning Liberty as the central motor of the world's ethical and social revolution. The horizon of Justice that is followed by Buddhist Law proposes an articulation between Truth-Restoration-Reconciliation, activating a very clear and profound humanitarian commitment.

Master Maitreya

martes, 9 de mayo de 2017

Legal Opinion on President Maduro

Case 24-2017: Venezuelan Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ)
May 4, 2017
Following the continuing oppression suffered by the Venezuelan People on the part of the de facto President Nicolás Maduro, who continues to violate the Constitution and International Treaties signed by Venezuela, it will then be determined whether the facts presented constitute an act of perpetuation and a deepening of the crimes carried out by the Venezuelan Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ) that have already been sentenced by the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights.
I.                   Description of the Case
In 2004, the organization Human Rights Watch warned that the Venezuelan government was creating a law that would allow it to control and manipulate the Supreme Tribunal of Venezuela, which implied breaking the independence of the judicial power, breaking the division of powers that is fundamental in a Democratic Constitutional State of Law. Furthermore, during the case of the Supreme Tribunal of Venezuela (TSJ), there were public statements by President Maduro confirming that he was behind the illegal measures taken by said Supreme Tribunal that violated the Constitutional State of Law and the International Human Rights Law, since he said he would quickly cancel such measures to avoid conflicts between the Attorney General and the Supreme Tribunal. A few days after cancelling the measures taken by the Venezuelan Supreme Tribunal of justice (TSJ), which had been literally a "Coup d'état", the government of Maduro and its paramilitary groups began a new violent and murderous repression against peaceful demonstrators, causing dozens of dead people with total impunity. International organizations such as the OAS denounced this murderous repression and also the "Coup d'état", which is why the de facto President Maduro announced the withdrawal of Venezuela as a member of the OAS. At the same time, after receiving no criticism from the Vatican in the face of these illegal acts, on May 1, 2017, President Maduro announced that he would create a new Constitution, but not through convening the Parliament but by convening civil groups allied with his government, which constitutes not only a new violation of the Constitution created by Hugo Chavez but also a new deepening of the "Coup d’état". In fact, political scientist Nicmer Evans, a member of the ruling political party, has confirmed that President Maduro is making a clear betrayal of Chávez and the people, suspending all the State of Law and initiates a dictatorial period, being a coup against the Constitution Promoted by Chávez. With respect to the deepening of the crimes previously initiated by the Venezuelan Supreme Tribunal (TSJ), the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights proceeds to issue the following ethical legal opinion on the Responsibility of President Maduro.
II.               Preliminary Warning
The International Buddhist Ethics Committee & Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights evaluates violations of ethics and human rights, so that its legal framework is Buddhist Tribal Law and International Law. These procedures are millennial and intrinsic to the self-government system of the spiritual commune (sangha), although they have the innovation of the universal jurisdiction that allows analyzing violations of other communities and countries.
The legal cases carried out end with a Judgment. However, when the sentencing conditions worsen, the Judgment acquires an immediate ethical legitimacy to issue legal acts, notices, resolutions, communiqués and legal opinions denouncing such aggravations.
III.            Violations against the Constitution and Human Rights
In order to analyze in the present case the existence of an act of "Coup d'état" by President Nicolás Maduro from Venezuela, it is fundamental to offer precedents of the human rights violations made by the accused. Although President Maduro has been elected through vote, the fact is that he exercises a de facto Presidency in Venezuela for violating the principles of democracy and republican order, maintaining a systematic and widespread scheme of human rights violations. His ambition to maintain the absolute hegemony of political Power, something very common in dictatorial regimes, has led him to violate the right to freedom of thought and expression, threatening, harassing and assaulting journalists and the media, as well as censoring and restricting the right to freedom of information that the Venezuelan people has. In this regard, prestigious international organizations, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, have reported that Maduro's government has intimidated and harassed human rights defenders who were working in Venezuela. This illegal behavior not only violates the international human rights treaties signed by Venezuela, but also violates the very Venezuelan Constitution and betrays the libertarian principles of the socialist revolution. President Maduro has criminalized both the protest of civil society and the actions of opposition political parties, using the judicial power to intimidate and persecute political critics, including the illegal act of having prisoners of conscience, fraudulent trials and violations against due process, systematic and widespread arbitrary detention along with torture and inhuman treatment, in addition to having carried out extrajudicial executions by security forces that illegally deprive people from the right to life, reason by which the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights agrees with the OAS Secretary Almagro in the fact that these practices are characteristic of the beginning of an oppressive State and the end of the Democratic Constitutional State of Law. By depriving the people from accessing justice, truth and reparation, especially in cases of human rights violations, such as the multiple cases of torture and murder against political demonstrators which have gone unpunished, Mr. Maduro has broken the country's democratic social contract. The way how President Maduro deprives the people from their democratic rights, by refusing to call elections or to accept referendums by popular vote, shows that he does not embody the legitimate function of his office, but Mr. Maduro behaves like a de facto President, which implies that his entire government is nothing more than a military civic dictatorship that concentrates political and juridical power in a non-democratic force. Although President Maduro and the Venezuelan Attorney General have expressed that human rights violations are isolated cases, the evidence shows a broad and widespread pattern of abuses, since the latter were a systematic practice of the security forces and with the complicity of prosecutors and country judges. This environment of impunity is also accompanied by an environment of corruption and drug trafficking, as evidenced in a trial against President Maduro's nephews, the Venezuelan government and its military forces control all drug trafficking in Venezuela and thanks to the complicity and Corruption of the Venezuelan government, this country transits almost half of the drug of the whole world. Instead of being dedicated to a socialist revolution that brings liberty, equality and fraternity to the all the people, President Maduro's civic-military government is dedicated to organized crime and human rights abuses.
IV.            Crimes against Humanity
After having condemned violations against the Constitution and the International Human Rights Law by the Venezuelan Supreme Tribunal of Justice, under the leadership of President Maduro, it is an inescapable ethical duty on the part of the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights to establish whether within these violations "Crimes against humanity" were been committed. To this end, a number of complaints that have been submitted before the International Criminal Court (ICC) against President Maduro in 2014, 2015 and 2016 are considered as valid and legitimate. Precisely, in 2014, about two hundred lawmakers from eight Latin American countries denounced President Maduro internationally for "Crimes against humanity", asking to investigate his massive, widespread and systematic repression against peaceful and unarmed protestors, which included dozens of dead and tortured individuals.
In November 2015, Carlos Vecchio and Juan Carlos Gutierrez, representing a group of victims' relatives, filed a complaint before the International Criminal Court (ICC) for "Crimes against humanity" carried out by President Maduro to the civilian population, including evidence of systematic and widespread violence such as murders, torture and persecution for political reasons. This second complaint demonstrates that under Article 7 of the Rome Statute, President Maduro would be committing "Crimes against humanity" for carrying out widespread or systematic attacks against the civilian population, such as extrajudicial killings (examples: Genesis Carmona, Guillermo Sánchez and Kluiverth Roa), illegal deprivation of liberty (Examples: Christian Holdack, Luis Augusto Matheus Chirinos, Marcelo Crovato and Rosmit Mantilla), torture (example: Gloria Tobón), persecution of groups for political reasons (examples: Antonio Ledezma, Leopoldo López, Daniel Ceballos and Enzo Scarano) and other Inhuman acts (example: Juan Manuel Carrasco). The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights has found that in 2014 President Maduro adopted a state system of attack against the politically dissident civilian population, restricting and punishing opposition political demonstrators through human rights violations that include the commission of "Crimes Against humanity" perpetrated in a widespread and systematic way by state security forces and paramilitary groups under the de facto control of Mr. Maduro. In a short period of time, in 2014, more than 33 murders against civilians, imprisonment of over 3300 demonstrators, torture of more than 400 demonstrators, and inhumane treatment of more than 800 people were carried out, all of this being an event that, due to the impunity sustained by the Vatican and the international courts, has occurred again during April 2017 with the same repressive intensity on the part of the dictatorial government of Maduro.
Also in 2015, the Colombian Attorney General, Mr. Alejandro Ordóñez, presented to the International Criminal Court (ICC) a report on "Crimes against humanity" committed by President Maduro against Colombian citizens, including crimes of forced displacement of 15,000 people, forced disappearances and torture against Colombian citizens living on the border within Venezuelan territory, in a clear systematic and widespread attack.
In 2016, social activist Lilian Tintori, wife of political prisoner Leopoldo López, filed a new complaint before the International Criminal Court (ICC) against President Maduro for "Crimes against humanity", denouncing torture against political prisoners along with harassment and persecution of political parties. President Maduro has led a plan of intimidation, confrontation and punishment against political dissidents, systematically threatening the civilian population through violent repression and judicial persecution, so that the de facto President Maduro punishes the political opposition with a system of oppression where the paramilitary security forces, paramilitary groups, prosecutors, judges and the Venezuelan Supreme Court (TSJ), in an accomplice way, are all involved in a civic-military dictatorship that provides impunity to widespread crimes of brutal, indiscriminate and disproportionate violence that affects all social classes in the country, since the victims are politicians, students, lawyers, social activists, businessmen and ordinary citizens.
The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights sends a message of solidarity to the entire people of Venezuela, by promising them not to ignore their suffering as well as it does not go unpunished in oblivion. Therefore, beyond punishments, it is indispensable that the Truth is denounced and clearly established. It is confirmed that the victims of President Maduro are recognized here and now through the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights, which states that Dictator Maduro has generally committed "Violations of International Human Rights Law", and that he has specifically committed "Crimes against humanity". As the international courts seem to be slowly disappearing within the framework of an international community of increasingly populist and authoritarian States, the work of the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights acquires great value so that international crimes do not go unpunished. Although the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights does not have any kind of police force to punish or detain the crimes led by President Maduro, certainly the Buddhist Tribunal has supreme ethical and spiritual power to dictate his Responsibility in the "Coup d’état" and in "Crimes against humanity ". In the weeks previous to the last election that the government lost, President Maduro had warned that if they lost those legislative elections then Venezuela would enter one of the most turbid and poignant stages of its political life because its revolution would become civic-military. History has shown that he fulfilled his promise.
V.                Conclusion
After describing the case together with the backgrounds of human rights violations carried out by the accused, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights is in a position to pronounce Nicolás Maduro's Responsibility in the "Coup d’état" in Venezuela, as well as in the Commission of "Crimes against humanity". The Venezuelan people is suffering a violation of its constitutional order by a regime that has violated the fundamental principles of human rights. The violation of human rights is the great problem of Venezuela. Maduro's dictatorial regime is the end of democracy in that country, ending with the Constitution and initiating a new fraudulent order legitimized only by his political party. Maduro's dictatorial regime has already violated judicial independence, taking ownership of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ) to uphold its conducts of arbitrary detention, political prisoners, annulment of Parliament, breach of social rights to food and health, annulment of the democratic rights to convene regional elections and recall referendum, violent repression of peaceful demonstrators and unpunished killings by security forces and paramilitary groups. This system of corruption and impunity has consolidated the Presidency of Maduro as an authoritarian and dictatorial regime that violates the guidelines provided in the Venezuelan Constitution, calling for the creation of a new Constitution but without resort to Parliament or to universal suffrage of People which is the basis of national sovereignty. The de facto president of Venezuela is turning a republic system into a dictatorship ignoring the constituent power of the Venezuelan people, since without the direct approval of the electors - or indirect approval through their representatives - any process of a new Constitution would be invalid, Illegal, unconstitutional and fraudulent. The nation is integrally formed by all citizens, and not only by the sector of those who follow the governing party. When a government only provides rights to its followers, this populism system becomes a perverse tool of political, economic, cultural and environmental oppression. The deepening of the "Coup d'état" carried out by President Maduro, through the illegal creation of a new Constitution, violates the fundamental principles of liberty, equality and fraternity, being convened on the basis of political discrimination and the antidemocratic form, usurping the original constituent power of the Venezuelan people. Maduro's presidency violates the elementary principles recognized in international human rights standards, as well as in the democratic system of Venezuela's own national Constitution, by carrying out a "Coup d'état" promoted from its presidency in order to usurp and annul definitively the power of the people, simultaneously intimidating the national and international community with violence and assassinations. The Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights expresses its solidarity with the Venezuelan people and accompanies them in their quest for Independence, Human Rights and Democracy. In defending liberty, equality and fraternity of the whole humanity, promoting respect for the dharmic nature or intrinsic dignity of all human beings, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights has found sufficient evidence to confirm a legal Opinion against Nicolas Maduro for "Coup d'état" and "Crimes against humanity", being an Opinion that is a consequence of the deepening of the previous Judgment for "Violation of the Democratic Constitutional State of Law" and "Violation of the International Human Rights Law". In accordance with international treaties, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights has the absolute duty to enforce the right to life, the right to peace, the right to justice and the right to health, all of which have been violated widespreadly and systematically by the de facto President Nicolás Maduro.
Ergo, the Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights rules as the following:
1.      It is declared as illegal and a "Coup d'état" to call for a new Constitution in Venezuela.
2.      It is stated that President Maduro violates the human rights of the Venezuelan people by not providing full access to health, work, justice, democracy and peace.
3.      It is required all neighboring countries of Venezuela to receive and not to expel the thousands of future Venezuelan refugees who might flee from the "Crimes against humanity" carried out by Maduro, even with a possibility that Venezuela may suffer a civil war.
4.      It is required that Fatou Bensouda, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), starts working properly in the case of Venezuela and she promptly brings President Maduro to the international justice for "Crimes against humanity", hereby putting on record the fact that indifference or unjustified delay in giving justice to these crimes constitutes an act of complicity by omission.
Always in a spirit of reconciliation,
Master Maitreya Samyaksambuddha

President of the International Buddhist Ethics Committee & Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights

jueves, 4 de mayo de 2017



This Manifesto is a conscious Commitment between the different paths, schools and lineages represented in the United Buddhist Nations Organization;
This Manifesto is a public Commitment to the Nations of the world in a conciliatory and pacifist desire, by transforming into a full and revolutionary Spiritual Discourse;
The present Manifesto is a noble and critical response to the actions of governments, which do not adequately represent the interests that have been formulated by the Nations, since in governmental actions there is usually no interest imbued with peace, justice, education and ecology;
This Manifesto is a profound and necessary vision, since humanity requires the guidance of spiritual masters in order to survive and evolve;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities, united in the United Buddhist Nations Organization, send friendly greetings to the whole world when announcing our events;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are part of the great human family as members with full collective rights;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities join the international community as a supreme force in pursuit of mutual Liberation;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are the great victory of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity at a global level;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are the great bastion of universal solidarity toward all sentient beings, so their cause will never triumph completely, but will be a horizon toward an increasingly better world;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are the seeds of a new world order which has not been yet developed;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are the dharmic conquest of the democratic Nations and republics;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are a national and international political authority, appealing to all Nations to declare the end of the terrible evils of war, injustice, ignorance and pollution;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are aware of their revolutionary force, calling for the Nations to manifest and act democratically against authoritarian and dominant governments, always promoting world peace;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are a coalition of brothers and sisters of the Way, who can work together for the defense of human rights and the culture of peace both in the East and West;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are opposed to any justification or support for war, because the United Buddhist Nations Organization will always support the construction of a Civilization of Liberation;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are courageous and righteous, so they should never be complicit in conflicts, especially in the face of military actions of violence, invasion and despotism;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are regulated by friendship, to put an end to the massacres that dishonor the intrinsic nature of human dignity, by projecting a light of hope about the birth of the Liberation of all Nations;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are the cultural treasure of humanity, crossing the river of life toward the new stage of human evolution and civilization;
The Buddhist Peoples and Spiritual Communities are the call for a new international reconciliation, which will ensure the full emancipation of present and future generations.

Master Maitreya Samyaksambuddha
President of the United Buddhist Nations Organization
March 28, 2017

lunes, 1 de mayo de 2017

Peace Recognition for Sea Shepherd Conservation Society

Peace Recognition for Sea Shepherd Conservation Society

Sunday 30 April, 2017
The International Buddhist Ethics Committee & Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights,
Recalling the Buddhist Ethical Precept based on the prevention of harming sentient beings;
Considering that the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is an international non-profit institution whose ecological mission is to conserve the lives of millions of marine animals, seeking to halt the destruction of the oceanic ecosystem at a global level;
Aware that the President and Founder of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, Captain Paul Watson, has been subjected to juridical persecutions at international level precisely for interfering with illegal whaling through direct action;
Deeply concerned that the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has been defamed as an eco-terrorist organization by the Japanese government and that the Costa Rican government has issued an Interpol arrest warrant, when the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society is actually a people's non-violent vigilante force in compliance with International Law;
Deploring that Japan, Norway and Iceland continue to hunting whales for commercial and non-scientific purposes, although this fact has been banned by the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling, the International Whaling Commission and the International Court of Justice (ICJ);
Taking into consideration that the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has as its primary mandate the United Nations World Charter for Nature (1982), which allows groups of individuals to enforce Conservation International Law in international waters;
Analyzing that the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society respects other international conventions, such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Convention on Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention (NAFO), the International Convention for Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT), and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species.
Examining that the direct action methods of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society are aimed at non-violently protect whales and never attempt to cause harm to whale hunters, being true methods of civil resistance against illegality and impunity;
Showing consternation at the fact that the Greenpeace organization has publicly criticized the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society for methods of direct action damaging private property of International Law criminals;
Bearing in mind that the Dalai Lama T. Gyatso has supported the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, while recommending never using violent methods to achieve ecological objectives;
Notifying that the Dalai Lama T. Gyatso has also been charged as a terrorist by the Chinese government;
Reaffirming the need for the armies of the world to be reconverted into Mother Earth's global forces, always working in the service of peace, justice, education and ecology;
1.      Calls for humanity to defend the Spiritual Path of Humanitarianism, Righteousness, Truth and Harmony.
2.      Affirms that Captain Paul Watson is a hero or peace champion in the struggle for the Animals Rights.
3.      Appeals to the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol) in order to cancel the arrest warrant against Captain Paul Watson.
4.      Solemnly establishes that, according to Buddhist Law, species such as whales and dolphins - along with marine ecosystems - are nonhuman beings with full rights, which is widely recognized in the Universal Declaration on the Rights of Non-Human Beings, and that in such Declaration it is expressed the right of nonhuman beings that their interests are represented by social activists.
5.      Expresses that Sea Shepherd Conservation Society already complies with the International Law standards, having the mission of opposing illegal activities threatening the biodiversity and life of Mother Earth.
6.      Deplores that some governments and companies are destroying ocean life, annihilating multiple species and endangering ecosystems with total impunity.
7.      Declares the need for the international community to prosecute the crimes of Ecocide, considering them as international crimes as serious as genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes against peace.
8.      Calls for the international community to promote vegetarianism as an appropriate model of life based on respect for the rights of nonhuman beings.
9.      It requires that the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society does not stop its mission and solidary work that has saved thousands of nonhuman beings which also have a Buddhic nature that must be preserved and protected.
10. Offers spiritual support and ethical guidance to the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, not only to improve non-violent methods of struggle for a better world, but also to intervene more actively and directly in the causes of suffering of sentient beings, by putting advanced knowledge in Philosophy, Politics, Ecology and International Law at the disposal of its members.

Master Maitreya Samyaksambuddha
President of the International Buddhist Ethics Committee & Buddhist Tribunal on Human Rights