In a book on effective judicial protection that I published in 2005, I pointed out that one of the factors influencing said protection is the “desire to flatter political power.” I expressed, among other things: “…a judge, a magistrate judge can fall prey to the temptation to issue an illegal verdict in order to be in good standing with an influential politician who can “liquidate” or “help” him when the time comes to reorganize the judiciary, or who has ” the power” to move the chips, as it is commonly said, in such a way that the judge or magistrate may be sanctioned and even fired”.

Years have passed and things have not changed. In decision 37-19-IN/21, in the final vote, the former president of the Constitutional Court and judge Daniela Salazar stated: “This time under the title of “evaluation” the same thing was done again: a mass change of judges of the Ecuadorian high court before the end of their usual mandates. The result is that, through the assessment of professional efficiency, the vast majority of the highest body for the implementation of regular justice is again dismissed from office beyond the appointment period established in the Constitution. A few weeks ago (before the last sectional elections) I wrote in this column: “This Ecuador is full of perversions.” The judicial political persecution of right-wing and left-wing figures, ordinary citizens as well as the rich, is so disastrous… filing lawsuits everywhere to see who wins the lottery is reprehensible.”

Human rights have no parties, dear reader. Justice cannot be lenient. We have to free her.

These quotes are very relevant in these times. It seems that we still haven’t learned the lesson about the independence of the judiciary and the banishment of politics associated with the judiciary. It turns out that the court process, which used to be called something else, is now called a “meeting”, which was the political slogan of the current government. It seems that we are on the threshold of a new judicial drama: another case of organized crime with governmental roots, even the President of the Republic wants to be associated with the drug trade, which seems infamous. Government mistakes and political passion must not lead to recklessness. In my last article, I mentioned the abuse case of Alexis Mera. Accused of one crime and convicted of another (even data found on a co-defendant’s computer, not Merino’s, was used as prosecution evidence). Sentenced to eight years, he filed an appeal for review due to factual errors in the judgment and the court of the National Court of Justice, in violation of the well-known judgment of the Constitutional Court (168-19-EP, which cites others), refused to act on such an appeal, denying him the right to defence. And sealed the evil. Sorry, the situation. Human rights have no parties, dear reader. Justice cannot be lenient. We have to free her. “Injustice committed once is a threat to all.”

And if the tortilla turns tomorrow? (OR)