A/HRC/41/18/Add.1 9. On the other hand, the report totally omits the goals and advances achieved by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in the area of human rights. On this point, one must keep in mind that the OHCHR is called upon, by international norms and principles, to carry out in its reports an objective and impartial evaluation of the human rights situation in the countries that make up the UN. This objectivity in the analysis can only be reached by carrying out a fair balance in the handling of the information sources, as well as the advances and challenges presented by a determined State subjected to evaluation. 10. An analysis is not impartial nor objective when negative indications are extremely privileged, and advances and measures adopted in the issue of human rights are made invisible or minimized. An evaluation is also not objective when references to the critical sectors abound and official information contributed by the State or positive references made by competent international organizations on the issue are omitted. 11. The Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela reiterates its rejection to the methodology employed by the OHCHR in order to evaluate the report on the human rights situation in the country. The imprecisions, errors, lack of context and false affirmations that the OHCHR makes, are uncountable, due to the inadequate use of the available sources. In the following paragraphs, we will point out, examples of some of those errors. Factual Errors in the Report 12. In paragraph 11, the report omits making reference to other measures implemented by the Government of Venezuela that positively impact the Venezuelan people’s purchasing power. Among these measures are: the monthly money assignment system through the Homeland Card7, the general subsidy to the costs of public services (water, electricity, domestic gas, transportation, Internet), the gratuity of the education and healthcare systems, as well as the universality of the social security pension system, among others. All of this information was provided to the OHCHR during its visit to Venezuela. 13. On paragraph 12, the report points out various factors that supposedly impinge upon the situation of the right to an adequate living standard in Venezuela. Said reference fails to include the impact generated by the unilateral coercive measures adopted by the Government of the United States against the country. 14. In that same paragraph, the report affirms that members of the Government have recognized certain aspects of the “humanitarian crisis.”8 This affirmation is erroneous given that no authority has recognized the existence of a “humanitarian crisis” in Venezuela, as the conditions required for it in international law have not been met. The Government has recognized that the aggressions against Venezuela are generating negative impacts on the social situation and has put in place mechanisms to receive technical humanitarian assistance in order to face those effects. 15. In any case, it is worrying the lightness with which the OHCHR uses the term “humanitarian crisis” in its report, especially considering that it does not present data or elements that allow for the objective substantiation of such a characterization of the country’s situation. On this point, it is worth noting what was pointed out by the Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order, in regard to its mission in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela: The “crisis” in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is an economic crisis, that cannot be compared with the humanitarian crises in Gaza, Yemen, Libya, the Syrian Arab Republic, Iraq, Haiti, Mali, the Central African Republic, South Sudan, Somalia or Myanmar, among others. It is significant that when, in 2017, the Bolivarian Republic f Venezuela requested the medical assistance of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, the request was rejected because it “continues to be a high-income country… and, as such, it does not qualify for such assistance”. During his mission, the Independent Expert spoke about the 7 8 The Homeland Card system covers more than 80% of the country’s population and includes monthly money assignments, with a sum close or equal to a month’s national minimum wage. This claim is repeated in paragraph 60 of the report. 3