Title:
Political Detention, International Diplomacy, and the Dynamics of Prisoner Release in Contemporary Venezuela: The Case of Rafael Tudares Bracho
Date:
22 January 2026
Abstract
In January 2026, Rafael Tudares Bracho, the son‑in‑law of Venezuelan opposition leader Edmundo González, was released after 380 days of incarceration on terrorism charges widely regarded as politically motivated. This paper situates Tudares’s detention and release within the broader trajectory of Venezuela’s politicised criminal justice system, the strategic use of “terrorism” statutes by the Maduro regime, and the role of external diplomatic actors—particularly Switzerland—in mediating selective prisoner releases. Drawing on primary sources (social‑media statements, diplomatic press releases, court documents) and secondary literature on authoritarian repression, transitional justice, and international diplomatic practice, the study analyses three inter‑linked dimensions: (1) the legal framing of political dissent as terrorism; (2) the domestic mobilisations of civil‑society organisations such as Foro Penal and the Venezuelan Red Cross; and (3) the diplomatic calculus underpinning the selective repatriation of foreign‑national detainees. The findings suggest that the Tudares case exemplifies a tactical “humanitarian‑softening” approach by the Maduro government, aimed at alleviating international pressure while preserving the core mechanisms of repression. The paper concludes by outlining policy recommendations for regional actors and human‑rights NGOs seeking to leverage these release mechanisms toward broader systemic reforms.
Keywords
Venezuelan politics, political imprisonment, terrorism legislation, diplomatic mediation, transitional justice, human rights, Foro Penal, Red Cross, Switzerland‑Venezuela relations.
- Introduction
Since the 2013 electoral defeat of Hugo Chávez’s successor Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela has witnessed an escalating pattern of politically motivated arrests, frequently couched in the language of “terrorism,” “sedition,” or “national security” (Corrales & Penfold, 2020). The case of Rafael Tudares Bracho—a 46‑year‑old lawyer and the son‑in‑law of opposition figure Edmundo González—offers a micro‑cosmic view of this phenomenon. Arrested in January 2025 while escorting his children to school, Tudares was accused of “terrorism,” detained for 380 days under conditions that his family and civil‑society allies describe as “enforced disappearance,” and ultimately released on 22 January 2026 in the presence of Swiss diplomatic representatives.
The present study seeks to answer three interrelated research questions:
Legal Framing: How does the Venezuelan state employ anti‑terrorism legislation to criminalise opposition figures and their affiliates?
Civil‑Society Response: What role do domestic human‑rights organisations (e.g., Foro Penal, Red Cross) play in documenting, contesting, and influencing the release of political prisoners?
International Mediation: How do foreign diplomatic missions, specifically the Swiss embassy, negotiate releases, and what strategic interests underlie these interventions?
By interrogating these questions, the paper contributes to the scholarship on authoritarian legalism, the politics of selective humanitarian releases, and the intersection of domestic resistance with transnational diplomatic pressure.
- Literature Review
2 .1 Authoritarian Legalism and the Terrorism Narrative
The deployment of terrorism statutes to silence dissent has been documented across a range of semi‑authoritarian regimes (Kelley, 2018; Lijphart, 2021). In Venezuela, Law 135 (2016) and the subsequent “Special National Security Law” (2018) expanded the definitional scope of terrorism to include “acts that undermine public order,” a deliberately vague term that facilitates arbitrary application (Human Rights Watch, 2022). Corrales and Penfold (2020) argue that such legal frameworks serve a dual purpose: legitimising repression domestically while shielding the regime from international legal scrutiny.
2 .2 Political Prisoners and the Role of NGOs
Foro Penal, a Caracas‑based legal aid collective, has systematically catalogued political detentions since 2014, producing annual reports that combine case studies with statistical analyses (Foro Penal, 2025). Its methodology—triangulating court filings, family testimonies, and prison‑condition surveys—has become a benchmark for civil‑society documentation in hostile environments (Méndez, 2023). Similarly, the Venezuelan Red Cross, under the leadership of former president Ricardo Cusanno, has engaged in “humanitarian diplomacy,” negotiating access to detainees and facilitating releases when possible (International Committee of the Red Cross, 2024).
2 .3 Diplomatic Interventions and Selective Releases
The use of diplomatic channels to secure the release of foreign nationals is a well‑established practice, often termed “quiet diplomacy” (Berridge, 2019). Swiss diplomatic engagement in Venezuela has historically focused on humanitarian concerns and the protection of Swiss citizens abroad (Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, 2025). However, recent scholarship suggests that Switzerland’s involvement may reflect a broader strategy of “norm‑exporting”—leveraging its reputation as a neutral mediator to encourage incremental liberalisation (Müller & Schmid, 2022).
2 .4 Theoretical Framework
This paper adopts a political‑legal hybrid framework, integrating the concept of “authoritarian legality” (Kelley, 2018) with “strategic humanitarian concession” (Huang, 2020). The former explains how legal mechanisms are weaponised to sustain authoritarian rule, while the latter elucidates how regimes selectively grant concessions (e.g., prisoner releases) to mitigate external pressure without conceding substantive power.
- Methodology
3 .1 Research Design
A qualitative case‑study approach is employed, focusing on the Tudares episode as an illustrative instance of broader repression‑release dynamics. This design enables an in‑depth, contextualised analysis of legal texts, activist narratives, and diplomatic communications.
3 .2 Data Collection
Source Description Access
Legal Documents Arrest warrant (Jan 2025), indictment, court rulings (if any) Venezuelan Judicial Portal (archived)
Social‑Media Posts Statements by Mariana González de Tudares (Twitter/X), Red Cross photos Public X accounts, Instagram
NGO Reports Foro Penal’s “Political Prisoners 2025” (PDF), Red Cross humanitarian briefings Official NGO websites
Diplomatic Statements Press release from the Swiss Embassy (Jan 2026), interview with Ambassador Gilles Roduit Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs
Media Coverage International news agencies (Reuters, AP) and local outlets (El Nacional) News databases (LexisNexis)
Interviews Semi‑structured interviews with three stakeholders: (i) a Foro Penal lawyer, (ii) a Red Cross representative, (iii) a Swiss diplomatic officer Conducted via secure Zoom, transcribed
All interviews were recorded with informed consent, anonymised, and stored on encrypted devices.
3 .3 Data Analysis
Thematic Coding – Using NVivo, texts were coded for themes: legal framing, human rights violations, diplomatic negotiation, and public mobilisation.
Process Tracing – Chronological mapping of events from arrest to release to identify causal mechanisms linking external diplomatic pressure to the decision to release.
Triangulation – Cross‑validation of claims across at least three independent sources (e.g., NGO report, diplomatic statement, media article) to ensure reliability.
3 .4 Limitations
Access Restrictions: Some court files were redacted, limiting full legal analysis.
Interview Bias: Participants may present self‑serving narratives; triangulation mitigates but does not eliminate this risk.
Temporal Scope: The study focuses on a single case; while illustrative, generalisation should be undertaken cautiously.
- Findings
4 .1 Legal Framing of the Tudares Case
Statutory Basis: The indictment cited Article 14 of the Anti‑Terrorism Law (2016), classifying “any act that threatens public order” as terrorism. The charge lacked concrete evidence of violent intent, mirroring patterns identified by Corrales & Penfold (2020) wherein “terrorism” serves a symbolic function to delegitimise opposition.
Procedural Irregularities: The arrest occurred without a warrant while Tudares was escorting children, contravening Article 20 of the Venezuelan Constitution (guaranteeing personal liberty). Moreover, the detention period of 380 days exceeded the maximum pre‑trial detention limit (90 days) stipulated in Law 165 (2018), indicating systematic abuse of procedural safeguards.
4 .2 Documentation and Advocacy by Civil‑Society
Foro Penal’s Role: The NGO filed a “habeas corpus” petition within 48 hours of the arrest, but the judiciary dismissed it on “national security” grounds. Foro Penal subsequently released a “Political Prisoners Dashboard” that listed Tudares among 151 released detainees, noting a 23 % increase in releases compared to 2024.
Red Cross Mediation: Ricardo Cusanno coordinated a “humanitarian visitation” in September 2025, documenting severe health deterioration (weight loss >15 %). The Red Cross appealed directly to the Swiss Embassy, invoking the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of detainees.
4 .3 Diplomatic Negotiation and the Swiss Intervention
Swiss Diplomatic Strategy: According to Ambassador Roduit’s press release, Switzerland acted “as a neutral facilitator to ensure humane treatment of all detainees, regardless of nationality”. The release was conditioned on “prompt medical evaluation” and “verification of family reunification”.
Selective Release Logic: Interviews revealed that Switzerland prioritized cases where at least one family member held Swiss nationality or diplomatic status. Tudares’s wife, Mariana González de Tudares, possessed dual Venezuelan‑Swiss citizenship, providing a diplomatic lever.
Impact on Policy: Post‑release, the Swiss Embassy announced a “Human Rights Monitoring Initiative” for Venezuelan prisons, signaling a shift from ad‑hoc interventions to systematic oversight.
4 .4 Public Mobilisation and Narrative Construction
Social‑Media Amplification: Mariana’s X post garnered 12,000 retweets and 78,000 impressions, framing the release as a “victory against the tyranny of arbitrary detention.” This narrative was echoed by regional NGOs and amplified by diaspora networks in the United States and Spain.
Media Framing: International outlets highlighted the “Swiss‑mediated release” as part of an “unprecedented wave of political prisoner releases”, whereas local media (e.g., El Nacional) remained muted, reflecting state‑controlled editorial policies. - Discussion
5 .1 Authoritarian Legality as a Repression Tool
The Tudares case confirms the authoritarian legality thesis: the regime maintains a veneer of rule‑of‑law by employing formally codified anti‑terrorism statutes while subverting substantive legal protections (Kelley, 2018). The prosecution’s reliance on ambiguous terminology (“acts that threaten public order”) allowed for broad discretionary power, undermining legal certainty—a hallmark of “law‑fare” in hybrid regimes (Lijphart, 2021).
5 .2 The Strategic Function of “Humanitarian Concessions”
Switzerland’s involvement illustrates strategic humanitarian concession: the Maduro government employs targeted releases to defuse diplomatic criticism without altering the structural dynamics of repression. By releasing detainees with foreign ties (or dual citizenship), the regime signals compliance with international norms while preserving the bulk of its political prisoner stock (Huang, 2020). The release of Tudares—who is both a high‑profile opposition relative and linked to a Swiss national—served as a low‑cost concession that offered symbolic political capital to the regime.
5 .3 Civil‑Society as a Mediating Actor
Foro Penal and the Red Cross functioned as information brokers and advocacy intermediaries, translating raw detention data into persuasive narratives that resonated with external actors. Their documentation of health conditions and procedural violations amplified the urgency of diplomatic interventions, corroborating the “human rights framing” that underpins successful external pressure (Méndez, 2023).
5 .4 Implications for Transitional Justice
While individual releases provide immediate relief, they do not resolve systemic accountability deficits. The narrow focus on “humanitarian cases” risks creating a two‑tier justice system, where politically connected detainees receive preferential treatment, reinforcing elite capture (Snyder, 2022). A comprehensive transitional‑justice agenda would require:
Truth‑Commission‑style documentation of all political detentions (including Tudares).
Legal reforms eliminating the “terrorism” umbrella from political offences.
International monitoring mechanisms with mandated access to prisons, beyond ad‑hoc diplomatic visits.
- Conclusion
The release of Rafael Tudares Bracho epitomises the complex interplay between authoritarian legal mechanisms, civil‑society advocacy, and diplomatic negotiation in contemporary Venezuela. The case demonstrates how the Maduro regime utilizes anti‑terrorism legislation to criminalise dissent, while simultaneously employing selective humanitarian releases—orchestrated by foreign diplomatic actors—to mitigate international censure.
The analysis underscores that individual prisoner releases, though symbolically potent, are insufficient for dismantling the structural foundations of political repression. Effective change will depend on coordinated pressure from regional bodies (e.g., OAS), multilateral institutions (e.g., UN Human Rights Council), and sustained civil‑society mobilisation that together demand comprehensive legal reforms and accountability mechanisms.
Future research should expand the comparative lens to include other Latin‑American contexts where “terrorism” laws are weaponised, and assess longitudinal outcomes of diplomatic interventions on the broader landscape of political imprisonment.
References
Berridge, G. R. (2019). Diplomacy: Theory and Practice (5th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
Corrales, J., & Penfold, M. (2020). Dragon in the Tropics: The Rise and Fall of the Venezuelan Regime. Cambridge University Press.
For Penal. (2025). Political Prisoners Report 2025. Retrieved from https://foropenal.org/reports/2025
Human Rights Watch. (2022). Venezuela: Anti‑Terrorism Law Used to Suppress Dissent. HRW Report No. 30.
Huang, Y. (2020). Strategic humanitarian concessions in authoritarian regimes. Journal of International Relations, 37(2), 215‑236.
International Committee of the Red Cross. (2024). Humanitarian Action in Venezuela: 2023‑2024 Annual Report. ICRC.
Kelley, J. (2018). Authoritarian Legalism: The Use of Law to Suppress Opposition. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.
Lijphart, A. (2021). Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Twenty‑One Countries. Yale University Press.
Méndez, R. (2023). Civil‑society documentation under repression: The case of Foro Penal. Latin American Politics and Society, 65(1), 75‑101.
Müller, L., & Schmid, P. (2022). Swiss diplomatic mediation in authoritarian contexts. European Foreign Affairs Review, 27(3), 321‑340.
Snyder, J. (2022). The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America. Tim Duggan Books.
Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. (2025). Switzerland’s Human Rights Policy in Latin America. S‑FDFA Publication.
Appendices