Diviana Márquez
In the cafés surrounding the Palace of Justice, in the hallways of law schools, and throughout the national political debate, one legal question echoes with growing force: Can Venezuela modify its 30-year maximum prison sentence and introduce life imprisonment or longer terms?
The proposal to impose life sentences for serious crimes such as corruption and treason has sparked concern and debate among legal scholars. For the average citizen, the answer may seem simple: “If the National Assembly passes a law, it changes.” Yet on Venezuela’s legal chessboard, moving that piece means challenging the backbone of the entire constitutional system.
To understand whether such a change is legally viable, we must delve into the core of Venezuelan law and examine the legal safeguards that protect the 30-year limit.
The barrier wall: Article 44 of the Constitution
The first and greatest obstacle to any criminal reform aimed at increasing prison terms does not lie in the Criminal Code but in the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (CRBV). Article 44, paragraph 3, speaks in unequivocal terms and leaves no room for ambiguous interpretations:
“Punishment shall not extend beyond the person convicted. There shall be no death penalties, life sentences, or degrading punishments. No sentence involving the restriction of liberty shall exceed thirty years.”
This provision functions as a humanitarian “glass ceiling.”
Article 94 of Venezuela’s Criminal Code reinforces this limit by establishing that, under no circumstances, may the cumulative total of sentences arising from multiple offenses exceed three decades.
As a result, no ordinary law or amendment to the Criminal Code can increase prison terms to 40 years, 50 years, or life imprisonment. If the National Assembly were to approve a criminal statute imposing a harsher sentence, that law would immediately become unconstitutional because it would directly conflict with the Constitution itself.
The “Lock Effect”: The principle of human rights progressivity
If the obstacle is constitutional, legal logic suggests that the Constitution itself would have to change.
At that point, however, the maze becomes even more complex.
The Constitution establishes its own mechanisms for amendment through Article 340 (constitutional amendments) and Article 342 (constitutional reform procedures).
Suppose a constitutional reform sought to eliminate the 30-year limit.
Problem solved?
Not entirely.
International law and the general principles of Venezuelan law impose what could be described as an invisible lock: the principle of human rights progressivity.
Article 19 of the CRBV states that the State shall guarantee every person the enjoyment and exercise of human rights in an inalienable, indivisible, and progressive manner.
What does that mean in practice?
In matters involving fundamental rights, the State may move only toward greater guarantees; it may not move backward.
The criminal law perspective
From the standpoint of humanitarian criminal law, the 30-year limit represents a progressive achievement aimed at promoting social reintegration.
Removing that limit to impose life imprisonment is generally viewed in international legal doctrine as a regressive measure.
Such a move would directly conflict with the international treaties ratified by the Republic, which enjoy constitutional rank under Article 23 of the CRBV.
The legal verdict
Can Venezuela modify its maximum prison sentence?
Legally, yes—but not through an ordinary law or an amendment to the Criminal Code, since that route would violate Article 44 of the Constitution.
The only legal key capable of opening that door would require an amendment to the Constitution itself, approved through a popular referendum.
Even then, any reform would still have to navigate the international debate over regression in human rights.
The debate is now on the table.
One of the central challenges facing Venezuela’s ongoing criminal justice reform is finding a balance between public demands for justice in cases involving serious crimes and the strict observance of the principles of legality and progressivity that underpin Venezuelan law.
