Venezuela is the creator of this version of the individual organized criminal
The recently enacted Organic Law against Organized Crime and Terrorism Financing ("LOCDOFT") establishes an individual mode of organized crime, when somebody acts on behalf of a corporate body or association, with intent to commit any of the offenses listed in said law. Likewise, the offenses typified in the LOCDOFT include, by means of reference, all the offenses cited in the Criminal Code and special criminal laws.
The above situation radically changes the text of LOCDO 2005, which required in addition to representation, the use of a digital device or electronic means. Thus, anybody acting in the place and stead of a legal person, such as a cashier, a clerk, a doorman, a Chairperson or whoever, intending to commit any of the almost 1,000 offenses contained in more than 80 criminal laws will be deemed an "individual organized criminal." Peanuts!
A review of the subject matter in the Palermo Convention and comparative law found interesting data, namely, among others: (i) under the Convention, illicit association means three or more persons, (ii) for the United Kingdom, it includes two or more persons, (iii) in the United States, it refers to six or more persons, provided that there is a leader in the gang of five or more members. In this sense, reference is made of criminal enterprise.
All in all, Venezuela is the creator of this version of the individual organized criminal. Where did such "great idea" come from? Is it to defend the legal entity from corruption and disloyalty of some of their "agents"? Or is it to get the legal entity, with no intent to commit a crime, into the mess? Who is the enemy? It is a mystery to unveil.
As late as Tuesday, February 25, there was some visible response from Gabriela Ramírez's office. Representatives of the Office of the Ombudswoman would visit independent human rights watch groups to find what happened in connection with repression of protests. That day, they visited NGO Provea. The next day, they met with the attorneys of NGO Venezuelan Criminal Forum. They pursued specific data because -they argued- no claims of human rights violations of demonstrators had been filed with the Office of the Ombudswoman.