On the crisis in Venezuela no one more than Alfred de Zayas, graduated from Harvard, professor of international law in Geneva since 2007 and the only United Nations rapporteur in Venezuela during the years of the Bolivarian Revolution, it can be a reliable voice in the chaos of fake news in which we are immersed these days.
We had the opportunity to interview him as an editorial staff of the Antidiplomatico.

THE INTERVIEW
Professor You were personally in Venezuela last year and drew up a very detailed report on behalf of the United Nations. What is the situation in the country?
I was the first and only UN rapporteur to have visited Venezuela in recent years 21 years. I have opened the door for other possible rapporteurs and also for the new Human Rights Commissioner, Michelle Bachelet, which was officially invited in December. My visit was from 26 November to 5 December of 2017: I had meetings with representatives of the National Assembly, of the Chamber of Commerce, with the diplomatic corps, opposition groups, non-governmental organizations, church leader, university students and professors. There is none “humanitarian crisis”, as clearly confirmed by FAO and CEPAL, nothing to do with the situations in Gaza, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Central African Republic. E’ It's true that there is a shortage of food and medicine, with the situation worsening due to Trump's sanctions and the commercial and financial blockade.
A narrative is being constructed in the international media that Venezuela needs “humanitarian aid”. Ma, reflecting, to help the Venezuelan people it would be enough to eliminate the sanctions which, according to Foreign Minister Arreaza, can be quantified as a robbery of 33 billions of dollars to the Venezuelan economy. Can you tell us what the effects of US sanctions are, Canada and the European Union on the civilian population in Venezuela?
This is an economic war that is crushing the country, causing much suffering among the most vulnerable. As I wrote in my report sent to the Human Rights Council, sanctions kill. The government has difficulty obtaining insulin, the necessary medicines against malaria, antiretroviral drugs, ecc. Food distribution chains have been disrupted by the internal war waged by the opposition. Most of the economy is still in the hands of the private sector and there have been numerous cases of hoarding, with food and medicines that are not distributed to supermarkets and pharmacies but are stored and then placed on the black market. Those who died from malnutrition or from lack of dialysis or other medicines died because of the sanctions. This raises questions of civil and criminal liability on the part of the countries imposing the sanctions, because they know they will cause death.

It's a premeditated murder. It's not just collateral damage.
So when the media and governments close to the United States repeat the mantra of “humanitarian crisis” what goal do they set??
The humanitarian crisis is hyperbole. Naturally there is a shortage of goods, but the cause is as I explained in the joint effort of United States, Canada and the European Union to cause chaos in Venezuela, with the aim of bringing down the government. The Machiavellian level of cynicism is unparalleled. Furthermore, he finishes “humanitarian crisis” it's just part of what they really mean and that is “humanitarian intervention” or better yet “military intervention to impose regime change”.
How do you judge the decision of the European Union and the United Nations not to present themselves as observers in the elections of 20 maggio 2018 despite the formal invitation from the Caracas government?
Bad faith. But it is important to underline that there were other international observers, in particular the CEELA, the oldest and most prestigious election monitoring organization in Latin America. I can send the final report on the elections for dissemination 20 May that, for the Venezuelan Constitution, it is absolutely legal and legitimate. Beyond 9 millions of citizens (47% of those entitled) they participated. The MUD coalition and Volutand Popular have decided to boycott them, but there were other oppositions represented and they got the 32% of votes with Henri Falcon at 21 % and Bertucci 11% . Maduro received the 68% of the overall votes.
Professor, how he considers as an expert in international law the decision to recognize the self-proclaimed president of the Venezuelan right by those states that have decided to follow the United States?
This is simply a serious violation of customary international law, of a violation of the Chapter 4 item 19 of the OSA CARD, and articles 1 e 2 of the Charter of the United Nations. The principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries is recognized in many rulings by the International Court of Justice, in particular in the famous sentence of 1986 Military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua vs. United States)
Consider the Montevideo mechanism, launched by Mexico and Uruguay, as the best solution for the ongoing crisis?
Absolutely. United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres also made a similar appeal for mediation and offered his good offices. But the Venezuelan opposition refuses dialogue, because they want to take power through a coup. The history of Latin America is full of right-wing coups and nothing is more undemocratic and corrosive than the rule of law than a coup d'état.