Yon Goicoechea, a Venezuelan law student at the Universidad Católica Andrés Bello and one of the main organizers of the Movimiento Estudiantil Venezolano (Venezuelan Student Movement) takes the opportunity to pay homage to Judge Alicia Torres, recently suspended from her post for refusing to sign an illegal order to ban Globovisión television executive Guillermo Zuloaga from leaving Venezuela. Unlike a lot of the chatter in Venezuela, his opinion is short and to the point, which makes for nice reposting to this blog (see the original in Spanish here). And unlike a lot of the chatter in Venezuela, the piece is also notable for its reconciliatory underpinnings. Rarely in political environments as polarized as Venezuela's does one see someone from one side willing to acknowledge the good done by anyone from the opposing side. Precisely because it so difficult to find both of these characteristics present in so much of the dialogue (or monologue, as the case may be) in Venezuela, I thought it worth translating and posting the entire opinion here. And for those keeping tabs, we are entirely open to alternative suggestions for English translations of the word, "caudillo".
To Judge Torres
No matter if she supports Chávez or not, Judge Torres defended our freedom
Weeks ago, Judge Torres boldly went public with the revelation that she was pressured to sign a decree banning Guillermo Zuloaga from leaving the country. Her nervous statements on television showed a woman not grounded in politics but in the law and reminded thousands of lawyers (like myself) of the obligation to be an impartial judge.
Today, as in most of our history, the military sticks its nose in the Supreme Court's business, creating the legal paroxysm in which we live. That armed officers may be planted in a judge's court to force that judge to issue a ruling is a sign of a society without law. The most serious concern is that this fact affects just a few of us, but this can be explained. The majority in our country have never had access to the judiciary and for them the Supreme Court did not exist and does not exist today, so its independence is of little concern. Nobody defends what is not theirs.
In a country with famine, the lack of independent judges is an intangible concept. In the end, justice is elusive, not easily made for television viewing, full of archaic 19th century formalities and, in general, not very close to the daily reality of the average Venezuelan. For the Judiciary to be democratic, two conditions are necessary: independence and accessibility. Never in the history of Venezuela have these two conditions existed concurrently, so institutions such as the Supreme Court therefore have no foundation or social validity in the country and consequently are vulnerable to strong-arming.
There is no freedom without the rule of law, there is no rule of law without a constitution and there is no constitution without independent judges. In this regard, Judge Torres defended our freedom, and, regardless of whether or not she supports Chavez (internal sources say she does), she deserves recognition. In her statements, she said: my job is to "treat each case as it deserves to be treated."
With that, she reminded those of us practicing law that what we learned in college has not been lost.
Leave a comment