The recent military operation that removed dictator Nicolás Maduro from Caracas and brought him before U.S. courts has focused the world’s attention on Venezuela. But lawyer Teresa Flores’s attention has been on that country and its allies for years, as has her interest in defending religious freedom.

A Peruvian, she lives in Chiclayo, a city almost unknown internationally, which in recent months has attracted attention as a center of “religious tourism.” The reason The new pope of the Catholic Church, Leo XIV, spent part of his South American ministry there, when he was still simply Robert Francis Prevost. He ate there, visited this building, and met that neighbor. With that, interest in religious issues is also multiplying.

Eleven years ago, Flores understood how her professional work as a lawyer aligned with the protection of this right, after participating in the Blackstone Legal Fellowship of Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF). She then worked for organizations connected to the issue, until joining the Observatory of Religious Freedom in Latin America (OLIRE), which she has directed since 2020, and where she monitors, documents, and analyzes restrictions and violations in the region. Unfortunately, her work seems to be increasing in a context marked by socialist regimes, guerrilla groups, and the rise of organized crime.

Here is part two of my interview with Teresa. (Read part one)

In the summer of 2024, the Sandinistas released evangelical leaders connected to the Mountain Gateway case. Did that episode impact religious freedom in Nicaragua?

For a long time, evangelical churches found it necessary to carry out their activities while maintaining a “low profile,” which cannot be interpreted as absolute support for the government, but rather as a result of fear for their safety, that of their families, and their congregations. However, the arrest and subsequent exile of 10 members of the Mountain Gateway Church in 2024 proved that the political passivity of some evangelicals does not, in practice, prevent them from suffering the consequences of repression in the country.

Although Mountain Gateway was not an opposition church nor had it adopted an explicit political stance, its growth and ability to mobilize made it visible and influential in a context where Daniel Ortega seeks to control any social actor with the capacity to mobilize. This logic was reinforced by the arrests of priests and pastors, forced exiles, stripping of nationality, closure of temples and religious organizations, confiscation of property, and cancellation of legal status.

The Chavista Constitution enshrines freedom of worship in Article 59 as follows: “Every person has the right to profess their religious faith and worship and to manifest their beliefs privately or publicly, through teaching or other practices, provided they do not contravene morality, good customs, and public order.” But, in practice, what is it like?

As we explained in our most recent country report, regarding the legal framework, the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic guarantees freedom of religion and worship as long as it does not violate morality and public order. It guarantees the independence of churches and religious denominations and recognizes the right of parents to choose, according to their convictions, the religious education of their children.

However, in Venezuela, there are laws and/or resolutions that, in practice, contradict the Constitution and, in fact, limit the right to religious freedom in its many dimensions.

The Chavista Penal Code establishes that any minister of any faith who, while performing their duties, publicly denigrates or vilifies the institutions, the laws of the republic, or the acts of the authorities, can be detained for one to six months. Furthermore, the “Constitutional Law Against Hatred, for Peaceful Coexistence and Tolerance” establishes sanctions, fines, and prison sentences of up to 20 years for anyone who promotes or commits “hate crimes” through their messages in the media or on social networks; and it is arbitrarily applied to censor any message critical of the government.

In general, religious affiliation itself is not a source of discrimination; however, the active participation of religious groups, leaders, and individuals in social and/or political initiatives can be grounds for reprisals.

There was a close relationship between deposed dictator Nicolás Maduro and some evangelical factions, especially those whose leaders sympathize with the regime. In practice, this translates into preferential treatment in terms of registration, issuing permits and authorizations, receiving goods, and accessing public services. For example, Maduro recently exempted evangelical churches from paying the fees for notarizing the articles of incorporation of non-profit religious civil associations.

This close relationship with the regime has led to measures such as the approval of the project to create the First Evangelical Theological University of Venezuela; the approval of a decree declaring January 15th as National Pastor’s Day, as well as annual commemorations of this day; and the launch of the “My Church Well Equipped” program, which provides state support for church restoration, social programs, and airtime on radio and television.

At the same time, the Religious Affairs Commission of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV, in Spanish) also held meetings with municipal liaisons to promote voting for Nicolás Maduro in the context of the recent elections. All the above can be interpreted as a form of acceptance of these denominations, but also as a form of control and manipulation to satisfy political interests.

Sources from OLIRE have emphasized that actors connected to the government’s security forces and state offices at various levels permit and participate in church activities, but only insofar as they carry out proselytizing actions in favor of the PSUV.

But has there been any resistance?

Yes. The Evangelical Council of Venezuela (CEV) has warned that groups aligned with the regime are not representative of the entire evangelical Christian community. On more than one occasion, they have expressed their opposition to government initiatives, arguing that the interest in favoring religious groups aligned with its agenda has a strictly political component, breaks the separation of church and state, and in some way seeks to advance the establishment of a particular type of religion or religious groups to the extent that they are aligned with it.

The Catholic Church, for its part, has, especially among ecclesiastical authorities, openly criticized the PSUV and its anti-democratic policies. They denounce the social and economic crisis, as well as human rights violations in the country.

In some cases, dictatorial regimes use affiliated organizations to create the appearance that religious freedom (or other types of freedom) is respected. In this maneuver, Castroism, for example, has twisted what could be a healthy ecumenism into a breeding ground for weakening the social influence of more militant organizations opposed to socialist values. Has something similar occurred in the governments of Caracas and Managua?

In the case of Venezuela, ecumenism has indeed been used as a political strategy. We can mention the creation of the Vice Presidency for Religious Affairs of the PSUV (United Socialist Party of Venezuela), an office created to strengthen control over all non-Catholic groups, now headed by Nicolás Maduro Guerra, the ousted dictator’s son.

Part of the strategies promoted by this office includes the establishment of Pastoral Councils of Government throughout the country with the aim of integrating Christian groups into the management of regional and local governments. These regional councils support government policies on religious affairs and are composed of delegates from some Protestant churches.

As far as we know, no similar office has been created in Nicaragua, but in general, the government has attempted to project an image of religious openness. Since 2018, and with increasing force in subsequent years, the government has established a kind of official religiosity or parallel church. On more than one occasion, it has sponsored religious festivities and celebrations in which the Catholic Church does not participate or has expressed disagreement.

The regime has also exerted direct pressure on evangelical networks to sign statements affirming that religious freedom is fully respected in Nicaragua. Official discourse also presents the government as the guarantor of faith and, at the same time, religious leaders as coup plotters.

What do you recommend to countries of the free world to contribute to the defense of religious freedom in countries like Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua?

It is important to contribute to efforts to monitor and document human rights violations, including an analysis focused on religious freedom.

It is also vital to continue providing spaces on various regional and global platforms to present the situation in these countries, to avoid normalizing this context. The support that these forums provide to victims is sometimes underestimated. Silence, on the other hand, strengthens the mechanisms of repression.