EXCLUSIVE CCD.-
Restoring justice from deterioration and politicization has become an urgent goal for at least 10 non-governmental organizations aiming to restore democracy amid the rapid decline of the judicial system.
On May 1, 2021, the prosecutor of the government of Nicolás Maduro, Tarek Williams Saab, criticized the lack of transparency from the International Criminal Court in its Preliminary Examination of the Venezuelan state regarding crimes against humanity. At that moment, Saab unusually admitted the responsibility of state officials, which he had previously denied, in the murders of political leader Fernando Albán and student Juan Pablo Pernalete, and complained that “efforts” to ensure the defense of human rights are “underestimated.” This was noted during the announcement of the presentation of the third updated report on the human rights situation in Venezuela.
Four days later, seemingly to convince the world of those “efforts,” the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) of Maduro’s government instructed judges to expedite processes to combat the procedural delays that detainees have been facing since 2020, under the pretext of reducing overcrowding in prisons.
Lawyers and human rights defenders doubt the alleged judicial transparency and attribute it to Maduro’s need for “an image change” in the face of international pressure. And rightly so, as there is a plethora of judicial cases highlighting the endemic lack of justice, worsening with the pandemic that began in March 2020 in Venezuela.
The lack of justice in Venezuela worsened with the pandemic
In January of that year, the coordinator of the Penal Forum in Carabobo state, Luis Armando Betancourt, pointed out that since Nicolás Maduro declared the State of Alarm due to COVID-19 on March 16, 2020, cases of violations of the due process of political prisoners in courts had increased.
He did not quantify them but asserted that procedural delays, for instance, worsened in all criminal courts across the country due to the paralysis resulting from at least seven TSJ resolutions ordering the closure of courts, except for those handling “urgent” matters.
“Procedural delays will increase if urgent policies are not implemented to expedite trials and hearings, and if the rights of detainees continue to be violated. There is a lack of a policy from Maduro’s Supreme Court that allows for virtual proceedings in this system. It seems they do not care; they do not care about justice, the system, or the health of their officials, judges, secretaries, bailiffs, or even the accused and lawyers,” cautioned the representative of the Penal Forum to the media, fully aware of the lack of quality internet service. He specified that as of January 25, only civil trials and some related to family violence, which had newly created special courts at that time, had been activated in digital format.
One year into the pandemic, the TSJ had not established any policy to expedite hearings or trials, and abnormalities in the system increased.
These are primarily observed in the processes concerning political prisoners. As of March 21, 2020, there were 320 classified political prisoners according to the Penal Forum: 197 civilians and 123 military; 296 men and 24 women; 318 adults and 2 adolescents. A month prior, in February, the number of men exceeded 300. By May 24, 2021, the total number of political prisoners had reached 301: 280 men and 21 women; 174 civilians and 127 military; 300 adults and 1 adolescent.
“Here, the revolving door strategy is applied: some political detainees are released for political reasons but, at the same time, others are arrested… And they are used as political bargaining chips,” noted Gonzalo Himiob, a director of the NGO.
The regime’s actions demonstrate this. While between September and October 2020 Maduro pardoned 110 prisoners, 50 of whom were political prisoners, numerous party leaders, human rights activists, opposition protesters, and journalists were harassed, and in some cases imprisoned, by security agencies. Others were subjected to criminal justice proceedings. The case of journalist and Voluntad Popular supporter, Roland Carreño, detained on October 26, 2020, has now become emblematic.
Common prisoners also suffer from violations within this system. Of the more than 110,000 incarcerated for ordinary crimes, about 65,000 remain in preventive detention centers — where they should not exceed 48 hours according to the COPP — and the remaining 45,000 are in common prisons, many of whom are awaiting final sentences, according to the NGO Una Ventana a la Libertad.
This civil association provided a bleak panorama of the courts in the Metropolitan Area of Caracas in its 2020 report, following the alert declaration due to the pandemic. “Between May and September of this year, two reports documented how the health of some inmates worsened, and during those four months, the prison population increased. While in May 2,607 individuals were detained in 26 police jails, by October that number rose to 3,072, indicating that overcrowding in these temporary spaces exceeds 200%. Of the total prison population, 2,824 inmates are men and 248 are women, while 3,065 are adults and seven are minors.”
Although the NGO advocating for rights in the penitentiary system has not established the percentage of procedural delays, in September 2020 many detainees were waiting for up to a year for the scheduling of hearings (either for presentation or trial). This is despite the COPP establishing periods, in the first case, no more than 48 hours and in the second, 30 days. This situation worsened in the pandemic year.
“There are inmates who have spent two years behind bars without a sentence, and they are likely serving a sentence longer than they should in prison,” said Luisa Macero, a relative of a detainee held in a holding cell of the Independent Municipal Police in Miranda, to the NGO Una Ventana a la Libertad.
Justice diminished during COVID-19 times
On March 16, 2020, the TSJ issued for the first time Resolution No. 2020-0001, consisting of eight points restricting access to justice nationwide until April 13, due to COVID-19. The same text was repeated throughout the year with modified dates. (The last resolution (No. 2020-007) ordered that “no court would work from September 13 to September 30, 2020, both dates included.”)
However, it was verified through online research and testimonies from lawyers that, despite some provisions and the establishment of courts and appellate courts, the results were entirely contrary.
For instance, the first article stipulated: “During this period, cases will be suspended, and procedural deadlines will not run. This does not prevent urgent actions to ensure the rights of any party as provided by law. The jurisdictional bodies will take the necessary precautions to ensure that the public service of justice administration is not suspended. Accordingly, measures will be agreed upon to process urgent matters.”
Although trial courts only processed flagrant cases, the processes in trial courts were paralyzed since March 16. Additionally, no reparatory agreements were made.
“We have gone six months without justice; there are no substitutes as before,” attorneys stated.
Nevertheless, this did not prevent the 11th Criminal Court of Caracas from dismissing on September 20, in record time, the case against Raúl Gorrín, Gustavo Perdomo, and Víctor Aular due to irregularities in a loan of 1.143 billion dollars, in exchange for bolívares, made by PDVSA to two shell companies associated with Gorrín in 2014.
Article two indicated that regarding constitutional protection, all days of the aforementioned period will be considered enabled. Judges, even temporary ones, are obligated to process and rule on the respective cases. The Constitutional and Electoral Chambers of the Supreme Court of Justice will remain on standby during the state of emergency.
It was verified that while the Constitutional Chamber approved 25 protection requests and issued related measures from March 19 to August 14, despite the restriction of access to justice, 11 of these requests were politically motivated, lacking urgent constitutional circumstances.
For example, while that Chamber declared an amparo request for habeas corpus in favor of Josnars Adolfo Baduel Oyoque, son of the former Minister of Defense Hugo Chávez, for arbitrary detention, it declared valid requests for:
-Seizing the facilities of Galaxy Entertainment Venezuela (DirecTV Venezuela) (19/05)
-Validating the board of directors of the National Assembly, appointed on January 5, 2020, unconstitutionally and chaired by Luis Parra Rivero (26/05)
-Declaring the legislative omission of the National Assembly “in contempt” (presided by Juan Guaidó) and appointing the members of the CNE, as well as taking away the direct vote from indigenous people (06/05)
-Urging the Committee of Nominations of the AN to submit the list of precandidates to the CNE within 72 hours.
-Appointing Indira Alfonzo Izaguirre, former president of the Electoral Chamber of the TSJ, as president of the CNE and Rafael Simón Jiménez as vice president (12/06).
-Intervening in the AD party and suspending its national and regional authorities (Exp. 20-0026, sentence No. 0071 from 15/06)
-Intervening in the Primero Justicia party and suspending its national and regional authorities (Exp. 20-0026, No. 0072- from 16/06)
-Intervening in the Voluntad Popular party and suspending its national and regional authorities (Exp. 20-0053 No. 0077 from 07/07)
-Appointing Leonardo Morales Poleo as rector of the CNE after Jiménez’s resignation (07/08).
Furthermore, with the appointment of the principal and substitute rectors of the CNE, the Constitutional Chamber disregarded the constitutional capacity of the legitimate AN to appoint the members of the Electoral Power. This was done without any consultation with civil society and delegated the swearing-in to the president of the Court, Magistrate Maikel Moreno, “given the relevance of the act.”
Article three established that in criminal courts, the continuity of the public service of justice administration will be maintained nationwide, according to Article 156 of the Organic Criminal Procedure Code, solely for urgent matters.
It was verified that only control courts worked on flagrant cases, according to litigants.
Article four ordered that the magistrates of the Full Chamber of the TSJ, during the State of Alarm (from March 16 to April 13, 2020, both dates included) would maintain the necessary quorum for deliberation, in accordance with Articles 10 and 11 of the Organic Law.
It was found that the Full Chamber, which “exercises its direction, governance, and administration to ensure the protection and tutelage of the rights and constitutional guarantees of the litigant,” had not issued rulings since March 5, 2020, according to the TSJ’s website.
Article five of the resolution due to the pandemic indicates that supervising judges, presidents of National Administrative Contentious Courts, presidents of Criminal Judicial Circuits, coordinators of Labor Judicial Circuits, coordinators of Judicial Circuits for the Protection of Children, and coordinators of Courts with competence in crimes of violence against women, are authorized to adopt measures to guarantee access to justice in various Judicial Circumscriptions, in accordance with this Resolution’s objectives, and must immediately report these to the Judicial Commission.
However, lawyers dealing with children noted that it was not until the week of August 10 that the resolution allowing courts in this jurisdiction to receive amparo requests, custody restorations, agreements, and social media approaches due to the pandemic came into force. These were done via email, but only two people were available to attend to users submitting emails.
Notably, the courts dealing with violence against women also received reports of cases, especially of flagrant crimes, through the victim assistance prosecutor’s office. Hearings were held, and one or two judges were on duty. “These cases increased during the pandemic,” according to a former family judge who advocates for women’s rights.
Articles six and seven did not require further confirmation, as they referred to the modality of guard systems “prioritizing the use of electronic media and official websites,” and compliance with biosecurity measures in all courts in the country, such as the use of face masks. Article eight required its publication in the Official Gazette and the Judicial Gazette, “without such publication conditioning its validity.”
The end of 2020 arrived without progress in access to justice, but with marked arbitrariness and politicization, according to NGOs and lawyers consulted.
On December 9, 2020, the TSJ issued resolution No. 2020-00035 to regulate the start of vacations in courts. It established that no court would operate from December 17, 2020, to January 17, 2021, both dates included, in defense of the “annual rest right” of judicial officials.
It also established that courts with criminal competence “will maintain the continuity of the public service of justice administration nationwide, according to Article 156 of the Organic Criminal Procedure Code.”
The decision was also based on the assertion that “the speed and good progress of the administration of justice is guaranteed by the Venezuelan State throughout the year.”
Justice in Maduro’s grip
In the face of demands for delays and violations of human rights, Maduro remained unfazed. Even a year after the pandemic, he has shown no interest in collective demands for improving the justice system, which has been deteriorating since 2020.
On January 22, during his speech at the Solemn Opening Session of Judicial Activities 2021 at the TSJ, he stated: “Venezuela has a powerful judicial system, of earned prestige, well governed and directed.” “Never, neither in the first, nor in the second, nor in the third, nor in the long period of the Fourth Republic, did Venezuela have such a self-demanding Judicial Power, as well-articulated and organized as a Nation-State.”
The current 1999 Constitution attributes new attributions to the TSJ as the head of the Judicial Power, alongside already established jurisdictional ones. It has governance, direction, administration, inspection, and oversight functions over the courts, as well as functional, administrative, and financial autonomy.
Maduro, in his address to the TSJ, referred not only to this but also to the figure of Maikel Moreno Pérez.
Various NGOs and lawyers believe that Maduro has intensified the politicization of justice and placed it at the service of his power and ideological-party interests, with Moreno Pérez at the helm. “He is the power within the power,” they refer.
This 55-year-old attorney (born December 12, 1965) was re-elected president of the TSJ for a third time on February 5, 2021, until 2023, with the unanimous decision of the 32 magistrates. Along with him, his trusted team of magistrates was also ratified: Lourdes Suárez Anderson as first vice president and president of the Constitutional Chamber; María Carolina Ameliach Villarroel as second vice president of the TSJ and president of the Political-Administrative Chamber; Yván Darío Bastardo Flores as president of the Civil Cassation Chamber, and Edgar Gavidia Rodríguez as president of the Social Cassation Chamber.
During the presentation of the 2020 management report at the 2021 judicial year’s opening act, Moreno Pérez praised the TSJ’s work. “It guaranteed the provision of justice services despite the conditions generated by the pandemic and the state of emergency”. He reported that the different chambers of the TSJ issued a total of 1,215 rulings. Of these, 30 corresponded to the Full Chamber, 274 to the Constitutional, 339 to the Civil, 128 to the Social, 169 to the Criminal, 70 to the Electoral, and 205 to the Political-Administrative.
The number of rulings was 58% lower than that presented in 2019 (2,893), according to the NGO Access to Justice based on data provided at the 2020 event.
“Moreno has become indispensable for Maduro, though he does not appear as visible, and he will be ready in the tricky terrain of a year filled with referendums and regional and municipal elections,” commented a practicing lawyer. Maikel Moreno has played a decisive role for Maduro’s government since he entered the Judiciary and was sworn in as a magistrate of the Criminal Chamber by the National Assembly on December 28, 2014. This is despite having a criminal trial in his record as a presidential bodyguard for Carlos Andrés Pérez for the murder of Rubén Gil Márquez in 1989.
Eight days after unjustly condemning the opposition leader Leopoldo López to over ten years in prison on February 16, 2017, for the violence in 2014, Moreno Pérez was first selected to lead the highest body of the Judicial Power.
His previous removal from the position of court of appeals judge by the Judicial Restructuring Commission on January 23, 2007, for supposedly disobeying a decision issued by the Constitutional Chamber did not hinder his assumption of the presidency. He was pointed out for favoring the release of the assassins of attorney Consuelo Ramírez Brandt.
Concerns regarding his lack of qualifications to serve as a TSJ magistrate, as established in the Constitution, did not either impede his presidency.
Maduro, his compadre and friend since 2006, backed him, and both protect one another. Moreover, he is noted to be the executor of presidential decisions related to his finances, as reported.
“The only merit that has taken Maikel Moreno Pérez to the Presidency of the Supreme Court is his ability to disregard the law. He will occupy the position to please Nicolás Maduro, from whom we can expect heightened persecution and arbitrariness,” asserted Juan Miguel Matheus, deputy for Primero Justicia to the National Assembly (2015) for Carabobo state, who has remained in exile since 2019.
A month after his election as president of the TSJ, the Constitutional Chamber issued the controversial rulings 155 and 156, which disclaimed the National Assembly’s functions since 2016, as well as the immunity of the parliamentarians elected by popular vote. The TSJ assumed the competencies of the parliament claiming contempt by the deputies.
“It is clear that as long as the situation of contempt and invalidation of the National Assembly persists, this Constitutional Chamber will ensure that parliamentary competences are exercised directly by this Chamber or by the body it designates, to safeguard the Rule of Law,” stated the judicial ruling issued at the request of officialist deputy Héctor Rodríguez.
The ruling prepared by the president of the Constitutional Chamber, Juan José Mendoza, which eliminated the parliamentary immunity of the assembly members after suspending the session of March 21, indicated: “It is pertinent to mention that parliamentary immunity only protects, according to what is provided in Article 200 of the Fundamental Text, the acts carried out by deputies in the exercise of their constitutional powers (which is incompatible with the current situation of contempt in which the National Assembly finds itself),” the ruling stated.
Ruling 155 aimed to enable the Executive to legislate on key aspects without the approval of the legislature and within the ongoing State of Exception: “The president is ordered to take the civil, economic, military, penal, administrative, political, legal, and social measures he deems pertinent and necessary to avoid a state of commotion… exceptionally reviewing substantive and procedural legislation (including the Organic Law against Organized Crime and Financing of Terrorism, the Anti-Corruption Law, the Penal Code, the Organic Criminal Procedure Code, and the Military Justice Code),” the document specifies.
Both rulings, two of the 143 issued against the opposition-led Legislative Power (2015) at that time, disregarding its competencies, are considered the most emblematic due to their high political content to annul the only legitimate institution in Venezuela. National and international pressure forced the president of the court to amend them and practically annul them through two additional rulings Nos. 157 and 158.
This triggered virulence. It led to unexpected challenges from prosecutor Luisa Ortega Díaz, who indicated that they broke constitutional order; exacerbated civil protests against Maduro that ended with state violence and left over 40 opposition and pro-government deaths; and turned Moreno Pérez into one of Maduro’s most sanctioned allies.
On January 18, 2018, the European Union made him responsible, along with other representatives of the Venezuelan government, for the repression and political situation in Venezuela. Three months later, the Swiss government sanctioned him for using his position to support and facilitate actions and policies of Nicolás Maduro’s government against democracy. The government of Panama also imposed sanctions on him due to high risks of money laundering, financing of terrorism, and financing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The latest, on May 18, 2020, was agreed upon by the U.S. Department of the Treasury and included the seven magistrates of the Constitutional Chamber.
Judicial specialists recall that the president of the TSJ has always been at the political service of power. From the control court and later from the Court of Appeals of Caracas, between 2002 and 2005, he issued pretrial detention against the Secretary of Security of the Metropolitan Mayor’s Office, Iván Simonovis, for the events of April 11, 2002.
That year, former DEM magistrate Luis Velázquez Alvaray accused Moreno Pérez of being a member of the group “Los Enanos,” which controlled a significant part of the Judicial Power. Control of this “tribe” of the Bolivarian revolution was attributed to lawyers Raúl Gorrín and Mariano Díaz Ramírez, who died in a suspicious plane crash on December 20, 2019. The Beechcraft 100 King Air plane, registration YV1104, which he occupied with eight others, crashed while landing at Óscar Machado Zuloaga Airport, known as Caracas Airport.
It is presumed that they were returning from Guasipati, Bolívar state, for business related to mining and gold extraction, according to information. The accident was confirmed the following day by Maduro’s government prosecutor, Tarek Willian Saab, who appointed two investigators to seek the reasons for the accident. A year and a half later, the results remain unknown. According to the deputy from Bolívar, Américo De Grazia, the aircraft carried “between 10 and 70 kilos of gold.”
Moreno Pérez, also as judge 34 of Control, oversaw the investigation into the murder of prosecutor Danilo Anderson, which implicated several personalities from the political, financial, and police world opposed to the Chávez government. Among them was lawyer Antonio López Castillo, son of Copei senator Haydeé Castillo de López, who was killed by police during an alleged confrontation in Plaza Venezuela. His parents were prosecuted and accused of possessing assault rifles and C4 explosives in their home in El Hatillo.
Justice under control
The degradation of the justice system has been progressive over the years, but recent times have exposed actions that contravene the principles of law, according to Access to Justice. “An irrefutable proof is that no judge has made a decision that threatens or affects the interests of the Government and its supporters; rather, they serve the absolute power.”
One of the most recent cases is that of the publisher Diario El Nacional. On April 16, 2021, amid the second wave of the pandemic, the TSJ in Civil Chamber ordered the publishing company to pay the second most powerful man of the “revolution,” Diosdado Cabello, 13.3 million dollars for moral compensation. The reason: alleged damages caused by the reproduction, along with 18 media outlets worldwide, of information published in 2015 by the Spanish newspaper ABC that labeled him as a “narcotrafficker.”
The ruling drew attention by setting an exorbitant amount without explaining the calculations and in petros. Moreover, it was issued without the conclusion of the criminal process that would clarify if any crime had resulted in the “damages.”
“They turned a sardine into Moby Dick,” commented the newspaper’s lawyer, Juan Garantón Nicolai, referring to the disproportionate ruling on a case that had been tucked away in the 3rd civil trial court for two years. In 2018, judge Gustavo Hidalgo Bracho had condemned El Nacional to pay Cabello 1 billion sovereign bolivars, which today equals 10 billion sovereign bolivars. The dollar price according to the Dicom rate of the Central Bank of Venezuela was 638.18 sovereign bolivars, while for the euro it was Bs. 730.01.
As Garantón Nicolai awaits the Constitutional Chamber’s decision on the review of the legality of the compensation, former OAS Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Catalina Botero, considers that the ruling against El Nacional violates fundamental standards of freedom of expression.
“In Venezuela, a media outlet was civilly convicted for a publication that offended a powerful official. Its sole purpose is to expropriate the media and finish suffocating the Venezuelan press,” she told El Nacional Web.
The publication of the ruling coincided with the dissemination of a new resolution from the Ministry of Interior, Justice, and Peace tightening the legal net around human rights and social affairs NGOs in Venezuela. Provision No. 001-2021, published in Official Gazette 42,098 on March 30, 2021, establishes a registry in which NGOs must register within 30 days. They also must provide a list of the organizations that make donations, as well as the beneficiaries, under the penalty of being considered “terrorists.”
The case of El Nacional is not the only one demonstrating the political handling of rulings. The NGO Access to Justice, which has rigorously monitored the judicial system since Hugo Chávez took power, cited another example of “the subjugation of justice to the whims of those who govern us.”
It referred to ruling 1,106 from the Political-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) on October 17, 2017. This ruling declared inadmissible the request for a precautionary amparo made by 14 lawyers, mostly former union leaders, against presidential Decree No. 2,718, dated February 7, 2017, which authorized the creation of the Socialist Justice Mission. This was published in Official Gazette No. 41,090 of the same date.
This body, attached to the Ministry of University Education, Science and Technology, was assigned the objective of “promoting and strengthening popular participation in the national socio-legal transformation process to consolidate social and communal justice” (Article 2).
Additionally, the Great Socialist Justice Mission was created as a cross-cutting axis of public security, according to Official Gazette No. 41,120 of March 23 that year, articulated with the Great Mission to all Life Venezuela and the Safe Homeland Plan.
Two of the mission’s highlights are the establishment of a kind of courts in communities through the so-called “houses of justice,” which will have a prosecutor from the Public Ministry, a judge, and a public defender to process offenses whose penalties do not exceed eight years. And also the Humanist Liberation Operations of the People (OLHP).
These “have turned out to be more than a security program, true roundups of the poor, and have turned citizens into targets of war,” the NGO asserted in a press release.
Without autonomy, independence, or information
The lack of autonomy and independence, another perversion that fuels the politicization of justice, was also evident during a year of pandemic. International judicial bodies have raised alarm calls.
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) lamented in its most recent report presented in 2020 that in the past 12 months, judicial authorities have taken no measures to combat the provisional nature of judges. This, according to the body, “has opened the doors to the co-optation” of the judges by the government’s supporters.
“Of 5,928 active and retired judges, 461 would have contracts with the state, and from this group, at least 52.5% would be registered with the United Socialist Party of Venezuela,” stated the IACHR in its investigation.
Moreover, over 90% of the Judiciary is composed of provisional judges, who can be removed without any trial and solely with a referral letter, according to a source from Maduro’s TSJ. No official documentation was available to support this claim.
However, the IACHR received information indicating that at least 75.63% of judges do not exercise their positions as holders, resulting in instability and lack of permanence in the judiciary.
In 2019, the body reiterated its concern regarding this issue. How the processes for appointing judges and magistrates were carried out, as well as the lack of guarantees for their permanence in their posts, undermines judicial independence and adversely impacts access to justice for the population, it reported.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights also expressed concern about the insecurity of judges’ tenure, as it exposes them to interference from their superiors and external sources. According to information received by the High Commissioner, TSJ magistrates have control over the decisions of lower courts throughout the country, especially in the field of criminal law. “Interviewees indicated that, particularly in cases of political relevance, judges await instructions from TSJ magistrates before making a decision, for fear of dismissal or other reprisals,” stated its latest report.
At the time of the UN High Commissioner’s investigation, a judge’s monthly salary ranged from 30 to 35 dollars, increasing the risk of corruption across all areas of justice administration.
Currently, a judge or prosecutor usually demands between 2,500 to 4,000 dollars to mobilize a criminal case, justified by the limited days of dispatch due to the pandemic. And if there are outstanding precautionary measures, each incurs an additional cost. In these cases, users of the justice system have nowhere to report. “The mafias operate from above and are difficult to touch,” remarked a criminal lawyer.
Various organizations have reported the situation in their reports and emphasized the urgency of rescuing justice from politicization and anomie, and thus restoring democracy in Venezuela.
A report titled “Justice as the Axis of the Transition to Democracy” released in 2020, published by the Constitutional Bloc last January, proposes a strategic plan for Venezuela that aims for political change while also providing citizens access to the system. As it is inconceivable to think of one without the other, it shows how the illegitimacy of Nicolás Maduro’s government leads to numerous and constant violations of human rights, which have escalated during the pandemic.
Nevertheless, the TSJ obstructs any strategy. The IACHR in its report claimed that the Judiciary and its highest representative, the TSJ, create “obstacles” preventing the resolution of the political, economic, and social crisis in the country.
“Instead of acting as a guarantor of the conventionality, constitutionality, and legality of the acts of other branches of State… the TSJ has created new obstacles to overcome the crisis facing the country,” stated the inter-American body, placing Venezuela, for the sixth consecutive year, on the “blacklist” of countries—along with Cuba and Nicaragua—that undermine the exercise of civil and political rights, “particularly in the exercise of freedom of expression and participation in public affairs.”