Statement on the announced reform and renewal of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice within the framework of the negotiating table  

The undersigned civil society organizations take note of the joint statement signed on August 12 by the delegations of the ruling party and the National Assembly elected in 2015, announcing the start of a process to reform the Organic Law of the Supreme Court of Justice (LOTSJ) and the renewal of all its justices.  

We welcome this announcement, as it places at the center of the reinstitutionalization agenda precisely the structural crux that we have identified for years as an indispensable condition for any real change in Venezuela: the role that the Judiciary – and in particular the Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ) – as an instrument of repression, political persecution, and the progressive dismantling of the rule of law. The fact that the reform of the justice system is an explicit part of these talks is, in itself, an acknowledgment of that reality, which civil society has consistently documented. What the negotiating table is announcing today confirms the validity and urgency of our long-standing warnings. 

This announcement is not a new issue for those of us who closely follow the state of the justice system in Venezuela. In this regard, we reaffirm and echo the proposals that Venezuelan civil society has developed over the years, as well as the recommendations that international mechanisms have issued on this matter. We make these inputs available to all parties involved so that they may be put to the best use: the technical body of work exists and must be utilized. 

Along those lines, we reaffirm the reflections and demands we presented just last week, on August 6, before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), where we outlined the risks and the minimum conditions that any process of reinstitutionalization of the justice system must meet – conditions that have been formally recorded in the Thermometer of Justice, Truth, and the Rule of Law: 

“No credible institutional reform is possible as long as the justice system continues to be an instrument of political power. An explicit political agreement is required – subject to international and civil society verification – that establishes the independence and impartiality of the justice system as a precondition for any process of institutional change. That agreement must include mechanisms to prevent interference by the executive and the legislature, and by any organ of public power, in judicial decisions; the vetting and removal of judicial officials, prosecutors, and public defenders who participated in the repression; and the immediate suspension of those facing open proceedings for human rights violations.” 

In vie wo f this potential reinstitutionalization process, we agree that we are facing a historic opportunity to establish democratic institutions – one that offers, for the first time since the 1999 Constitution took effect, the possibility that the selection of TSJ justices will fully conform to the constitutional model. As this is now part of the reinstitutionalization agenda, a window of opportunity has opened to correct the deficiencies that, on previous occasions, have characterized the reform processes of the Supreme Tribunal and the justice system as a whole. 

Beyond this prior political agreement, we demand that the process for selecting justices meet, at a minimum, the following technical guarantees: 

1. Full publication of the evaluation criteria, as required by Article 73 of the LOTSJ itself. Without rules known in advance – what weight professional experience will carry, how independence, ethical track record, and legal knowledge will be measured, and respect for human rights – it is impossible to verify whether the appointments will be based on merit or political preferences. 

2. Public access to the nominees’ files, not just the list of names. Civil society must be able to consult and cross-check each candidate’s professional record, potential conflicts of interest, and ties to state bodies. 

3. Establishment of an independent technical committee with the participation of national and international experts – including the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), universities, and civil society – to assist in the evaluation of candidates according to the criteria, without replacing the Judicial Nominations Committee but contributing to the technical and objective verification of its compliance. 

4. Restructuring of the Judicial Nominations Committee itself in accordance with the Constitution, restoring to civil society – and not to the National Assembly – the central role in the preselection of candidates that the constitutional text assigns to it. 

5. Reconfiguration of the Citizen Power Evaluation Committee, appointed last April in violation of the Constitution and the Law of Citizen Power, for the evaluation of candidates for the offices of Attorney General and Ombudsman. It is currently composed of 13 deputies, when it should be made up of members of civil society. The most egregious irregularity at present is that its president is the same person who chairs the Judicial Nominations Committee. 

Given the structural role this tribunal has played in repression, political persecution, and the gradual dismantling of the rule of law, we will closely follow and monitor every stage of this process. The opening of this process within the framework of the negotiation table may be a genuine opportunity to correct what has thus far been marked by opacity and political control, but it will only be meaningful if the result is judicial independence that is verifiable and sustained over time. 

The reconstruction of the rule of law in Venezuela begins with restoring the independence of its judges, and that trust can only be reestablished through a selection process that is constitutional, transparent, participatory, and based exclusively on merit. 

Signed: 

Acceso a la Justicia 

Aula Abierta 

Caleidoscopio Humano 

Human Rights Center of the Andrés Bello Catholic University 

Center for Justice and Peace (CEPAZ) 

Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) 

Civilis 

Comité por la Libertad de los Presos Políticos 

Defiende Venezuela 

Freedom House 

Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF) 

Ideas por la Democracia 

Justicia, Encuentro y Perdón 

Lateral Lab 

Observatorio Global de Comunicación y Democracia 

Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) 

Provea 

Robert & Ethel Kennedy Human Rights Center 

Voces de la Memoria