From the devastation of Caracas and La Guaira to the management of victims, the disaster demonstrates that identifying the dead is not merely a technical necessity, but a legal, civic, and humanitarian duty
Abstract: The earthquake that struck Venezuela during the night of 24–25 June 2026, affecting the country’s northern region and causing particularly severe damage in Caracas, La Guaira, and surrounding areas, calls for a reflection that extends beyond the immediate chronicle of a natural disaster. Alongside the search for survivors, the stabilization of damaged buildings, the management of displaced populations, the international coordination of relief operations, and the physical reconstruction of the affected areas, a less visible yet fundamental dimension emerges: the identification of the victims. In mass disasters, the management of the deceased is not merely a sanitary, mortuary, or logistical task; it concerns the right to identity, the preservation of human dignity beyond death, the possibility for families to achieve closure through mourning, and the need for legal systems to establish with certainty the civil, succession, insurance, administrative, and judicial consequences of death. From this perspective, Disaster Victim Identification (DVI), carried out in accordance with international standards and based on the systematic reconciliation of ante-mortem and post-mortem data, becomes an instrument of humanitarian legality, capable of transforming the chaos of catastrophe into a process of truth, accountability, and the restoration of identity.
Keywords: #Venezuela #VenezuelaEarthquake #Caracas #LaGuaira #DisasterVictimIdentification #DVI #DisasterVictimIdentificationProcess #RightToIdentity #UnidentifiedBodies #MassDisaster #AFIS #CODIS #DNA #ForensicOdontology #FacialRecognition #CivilProtection #OCHA #UNDAC #INSARAG #Interpol #InternationalRelief #SilvestroMarascio #EthicaSocietas #EthicaSocietasReview #ScientificJournal #HumanSciences #SocialSciences #ethicasocietasupli
Venezuela Once Again at the Centre of Attention Since 25 June
After the political turmoil of recent months, centred above all on what amounted to the abduction of President Maduro on Trump’s orders, the population of the South American country has once again, despite itself, returned to the forefront of international news because of the tragic events of late June.
On 25 June, shortly after midnight local time — 24 June, 6:04 p.m. — a rapid sequence of powerful earthquakes was felt across Venezuela, affecting a fault line that also crosses Japan. In terms of material damage, the epicentre appears to have been concentrated in the area of the capital, Caracas, and in the districts of Yaracuy and La Guaira.
The Damage Assessment
At present, the full extent of the damage cannot yet be accurately quantified. Assessments continue to rely on the provisional figures released by the Venezuelan authorities, including statements by Jorge Rodríguez, President of the National Assembly.
The situation must, however, be understood within its specific context.
Rescue teams are confronted with collapsed buildings, families torn apart by tragedy, and a death toll that has already surpassed one thousand victims—with current estimates referring to at least 1,450 fatalities—while many thousands of people remain missing. Numerous bodies are still trapped beneath the rubble, and the available figures refer only to the resident population, without taking into account transient individuals such as tourists, commuters, or travellers. Population records, in this respect, have yet to be fully established.
These are staggering numbers, directly proportional both to the magnitude of the earthquake—which was followed by additional aftershocks, including a magnitude 4.8 event near Aragua, approximately 70 kilometres from Caracas, on 27 June at 9:20 p.m. (3:20 p.m. local time), and another 5.1-magnitude tremor on 29 June—and to the high population density of the affected areas.
The comprehensive assessment of material damage will require time and will likely follow methodologies similar to those adopted after major earthquakes in Italy.
The process will begin with a census of completely destroyed buildings and those deemed only partially usable, many of which are expected to be demolished shortly thereafter. It will then continue with structural assessments of buildings that remain standing within the so-called “red zones,” namely the areas most severely affected by the disaster.
It is also likely that Venezuela will adopt emergency legislative measures to facilitate assistance for displaced persons through financial support, reconstruction programmes, and material aid, particularly to provide temporary accommodation, while also enabling the disposal of the thousands of tonnes of construction and demolition waste generated by the collapse of infrastructure.
These remain extremely dynamic and complex phases, however, as technical operations continue alongside humanitarian assistance. Rescue teams are still searching beneath collapsed structures, while healthcare and veterinary services are operating under extraordinary pressure.
International Coordination, Search and Rescue Operations
At a time when the international community has once again shifted much of its attention towards the Middle East and Ukraine—following the substantial failure of the proposed U.S.–Iran ceasefire and the renewed escalation of hostilities on Europe’s eastern flank, where Ukraine has modified its operational strategy—a significant international mobilisation has nevertheless emerged in support of Caracas.
The earthquake has not only devastated infrastructure and residential areas—with more than 800 buildings collapsing—but has also exposed the structural vulnerabilities of Venezuela, a country whose institutional capacity has already been weakened by years of international sanctions that have limited the government’s ability to implement effective social protection programmes, as noted by Michael Fakhri, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food.
Indeed, the disaster has struck a country already experiencing a severe humanitarian crisis. For years, Venezuela has faced profound economic and social instability, characterised by hyperinflation, widespread poverty, and increasingly limited access to food and healthcare.
Millions of people live under conditions of extreme vulnerability, while nearly eight million Venezuelans have been forced to leave their homes in recent years.
Against this already fragile backdrop, the earthquake has dramatically intensified humanitarian needs, making international assistance even more urgent.
The United Nations has activated its international emergency coordination mechanisms through the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination (UNDAC) teams, and the International Search and Rescue Advisory Group (INSARAG). Thanks to this coordinated framework, numerous non-governmental organizations have launched fundraising campaigns in support of Venezuela. Among those actively engaged is the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, operating through its volunteer emergency corps, the Italian Relief Corps of the Order of Malta (CISOM).
Management of the Deceased
Immediately after—or, more accurately, in parallel with—search and rescue operations, authorities must address another essential phase of disaster response: the management and identification of the deceased.
As already noted, the scale of fatalities is staggering. Alongside healthcare services, which are inevitably operating under enormous pressure, cemetery and mortuary services are also likely to face significant challenges, particularly regarding the management of unidentified bodies under extremely difficult environmental conditions.
This issue should not be approached sentimentally but pragmatically. An unidentified body is not merely an administrative problem: it represents the denial of a person’s identity and dignity, while simultaneously depriving a family of the possibility of completing the grieving process. This is not simply a humanitarian concern; it is the recognition of a fundamental legal principle: the right to identity.
In Italy, this right finds clear legal expression in Article 6 of the Civil Code, yet its practical significance extends far beyond any national legal system.
The implications are considerable. Identification enables succession proceedings, the execution of wills, the termination of contractual relationships involving the deceased, insurance claims, pension rights, civil registry updates, criminal and judicial investigations, and, above all, the restoration of a person’s identity to the family to whom that individual belongs.
In mass-casualty events such as the Venezuelan earthquake, this process falls within the internationally recognised framework of Disaster Victim Identification (DVI). The methodology applies equally to natural disasters—including earthquakes, tsunamis, floods—and to human-induced catastrophes such as major transportation accidents, structural collapses, or terrorist attacks, including events comparable to the collapse of the Twin Towers on 11 September 2001.
Operationally, two principal variables distinguish one disaster scenario from another: the geographical extent of the catastrophe and the availability of reliable information concerning the potential victims.
A further determining factor is time. The preservation of human remains depends largely on environmental conditions and on the availability of refrigerated facilities and appropriate forensic infrastructure. In this respect, the operational experience developed by the Italian Red Cross, whose mobile emergency units include refrigerated container systems capable of rapid deployment—a capability extensively utilised during the COVID-19 pandemic—offers an important model for large-scale disaster management.
The magnitude of the disaster directly influences the number of victims requiring identification. Equally important are the location and circumstances of the event, both of which significantly affect the speed and complexity of recovery operations.
A maritime disaster involving a cruise ship, for example, presents several operational advantages. Search and recovery activities are geographically confined to the vessel and its immediate surroundings, creating a naturally delimited operational environment. Moreover, both passengers and crew are fully documented through passenger manifests, employment records, and contractual documentation. Any unregistered individuals generally represent only a negligible proportion and may often be identified through open-source intelligence (OSINT), including social media analysis and testimony from survivors.
Natural disasters present a fundamentally different challenge. Their greatest uncertainty lies precisely in the unknown number of victims.
In Venezuela, where casualty figures continue to evolve, unofficial reports suggest that approximately one thousand buildings have collapsed, with direct economic losses estimated at around US$6.7 billion—roughly 6% of the country’s GDP—while at least 70,000 people remain missing, in addition to the confirmed fatalities. Importantly, the number of confirmed deaths does not necessarily correspond to the number of identified victims.
Within this context, information management becomes the cornerstone of the identification process.
DVI methodology is structured around two complementary operational components, supported by an integrated logistical framework: the Ante-Mortem (AM) unit and the Post-Mortem (PM) unit.
The Ante-Mortem Unit is responsible for collecting every available piece of information concerning missing persons. Its activities extend well beyond civil registry data, encompassing biometric characteristics, medical history, dental records, DNA reference samples, photographs, personal descriptions, tattoos, scars, distinctive marks, and any other information capable of facilitating identification.
Following the standardized INTERPOL DVI protocols, biometric evidence—particularly fingerprints, DNA profiles, and dental records—constitutes the primary means of identification. These are complemented by secondary identifying features such as tattoos, congenital anomalies, surgical scars, birthmarks, prosthetic devices, or other distinctive characteristics that may strengthen the attribution of identity.
DVI in Practice: A Brief Operational Overview
Scientific police units routinely perform human identification in ordinary forensic investigations, and the underlying principles remain unchanged during mass disasters. What changes dramatically is the logistical complexity and the sheer number of victims requiring examination.
Fingerprint identification remains one of the fastest and most effective recognition techniques available under current INTERPOL operational standards (Giuliano, 2017). Consequently, DVI teams invariably include specialist fingerprint examiners.
Fingerprint acquisition techniques vary according to the condition of the body. Depending on the degree of preservation, specialists may employ traditional ink methods, fingerprint powder transferred onto adhesive lifting tape, high-resolution digital photography, or, in cases of advanced decomposition, specialised forensic procedures involving the removal and treatment of the epidermal layer.
The principal advantage of fingerprint identification lies in the extensive coverage of Automated Fingerprint Identification Systems (AFIS), which remain among the most comprehensive forensic databases worldwide. Their principal limitation, however, is equally evident: identification is only possible if the individual has previously been recorded within the system, whether for administrative or criminal purposes.
Recognising these limitations, international DVI protocols deliberately avoid reliance upon a single identification method. Instead, they employ a triad of primary identifiers consisting of fingerprints, forensic odontology, and DNA analysis.
Forensic dental identification requires the presence of qualified forensic odontologists. In several jurisdictions—including Italy—the limited availability of these specialists remains a significant operational challenge. Furthermore, unlike fingerprint databases, comprehensive dental databases generally do not exist.
Dental evidence occupies a unique position, combining both biometric and medical information. Consequently, successful identification frequently depends upon the availability of ante-mortem dental radiographs, treatment records, or clinical documentation supplied by the victim’s dentist. Such information can only be obtained if relatives are aware of the treating practitioner and provide these records after reporting the disappearance of their family member.
DNA analysis presents fewer operational constraints. On one hand, a genetic profile recovered from human remains may match an existing profile stored within CODIS or other national forensic databases if the deceased had previously been entered into the system. More commonly, however, the Post-Mortem Unit collects biological samples from the recovered remains, while the Ante-Mortem Unit obtains reference DNA samples from biological relatives, allowing kinship analysis to establish identity with a very high degree of scientific certainty.
What About Facial Recognition?
This is an understandable question. Facial recognition technologies undoubtedly have an important role to play, but within DVI they remain essentially supplementary rather than primary identification methods.
Rapid OSINT investigations conducted through social media platforms may provide useful investigative leads, yet these approaches are constrained by platform privacy policies and by the uncertain reliability of user registration data, including the widespread existence of false or fictitious profiles.
Similarly, visual identification (de visu) may prove valuable during the immediate aftermath of a disaster when bodies remain recognisable. However, its reliability inevitably declines with the passage of time and the progression of post-mortem decomposition. For this reason, contemporary DVI protocols assign facial recognition a complementary role, while primary legal identification continues to rely on the internationally recognised combination of fingerprints, forensic odontology, and DNA analysis, ensuring the highest possible standards of scientific certainty, legal reliability, and respect for the dignity of the deceased.
OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS BY THE SAME AUTHOR
PALANTIR: MUCH MORE THAN A MANIFESTO
FIVE LATEST CONTRIBUTIONS
EUROPE BETWEEN BRITISH REARMAMENT, NEW TRADE BARRIERS, AND SELECTIVE CREDIT
FORMER COMMANDER OF THE CARABINIERI FORESTRY UNIT IN CEDEGOLO TAKES HIS OWN LIFE
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE HUMAN BEING: THE ONTOLOGICAL DIFFERENCE THAT CANNOT BE BRIDGED
Ethica Societas is a free, non-profit review published by a social cooperative non-profit organization
Copyright Ethica Societas, Human&Social Science Review © 2026 by Ethica Societas UPLI onlus.
ISSN 2785-602X. Licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0