By Luis Manuel Aguana
If the president of the National Assembly in 2015, whose five-year term has expired, is the representative of the “last internationally recognized democratically elected entity in Venezuela”, as stated in the third paragraph of the U.S. State Department's June 18, 2026, statement, then the Supreme Court Justices appointed by that Assembly in 2017 for twelve-year terms, while their term was still in effect, are not only legitimate, but also the only remaining vestige of Venezuela's institutional framework after the regime's collapse.
Yes, those magistrates who had to flee the country, persecuted by Nicolás Maduro Moros, to endure hunger and hardship in exile, and who were NEVER recognized by either the 2015 National Assembly as the legitimate Supreme Court in exile, or by the US authorities, so that at least their salaries could be paid with the corresponding recognition from the US government, as if it were being given to the representatives of the 2015 National Assembly.
On May 10, 2023, a group of Venezuelans concerned about this situation sent a letter to the director of the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), with copies to, among others, then-Senator Marco Rubio, now Secretary of State, and then-US Ambassador to Venezuela based in Bogotá, James Story, as well as the then-US Secretary of the Treasury, requesting the release of the “funds for the operation and remuneration” of the Supreme Court Justices (see letter of request in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/2023/05/carta-la-ofac-en-apoyo-al-tsj-legitimo.html).
That letter clearly explained the situation of the magistrates: “Regrettably, twenty-three (23) magistrates had to flee Venezuela due to persecution and death threats from the illegal and criminal regime of the tyrant Nicolás Maduro Moros. One of the magistrates, Dr. Ángel Zerpa Aponte, who was unable to escape, was captured, imprisoned, and tortured, and is currently prohibited from leaving the country. Since then, the twenty-three magistrates have lived in exile, scattered across five different countries: eleven (11) in the United States of America, four (4) in Panama, three (3) in Germany, two (2) in Chile, two (2) in Colombia, and one (1) in Spain.”
That request was rejected by OFAC, and the 2015 National Assembly did absolutely nothing for those magistrates in exile. We later learned unofficially that OFAC would consider the request only if the 2015 National Assembly formally asked for it—something that, in reality, never happened. One would have to ask the leadership of the 2015 National Assembly for the reason, but the fact remains—as is publicly and widely known—that they did indeed receive funds from OFAC and never accounted for them.
The 2015 National Assembly never recognized the magistrates who constituted themselves as a Supreme Court of Justice in exile—at the headquarters of the Organization of American States (OAS) in October 2017—as actually being the Supreme Court of Justice. They always referred to them as “legitimately appointed magistrates,” never as the Supreme Court of Justice in exile.
Based on the legal explanation of Dr. José Vicente Haro, a Venezuelan constitutional scholar, we believe that the Supreme Court of Justice in exile was and remains legitimate and constitutional (see Dr. José Vicente Haro's opinion, "Is the Venezuelan Supreme Court of Justice in exile legitimate and constitutional?", en https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/2018/06/es-legitimo-y-constitucional-el.html).
Despite the hardships faced by the legitimate Magistrates, the legitimate Supreme Court in exile has issued rulings that we consider historic for the changes that must take place in our country within the framework of the transition, such as the Ruling of Nullity of the Venezuelan Electoral System, File No. SE-2018-001, dated June 13, 2018, with Justice Domingo Javier Salgado Rodríguez as rapporteur (see in Spanish Supreme Court declares the use of automated voting for elections in Venezuela null and void, in https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/2018/06/tribunal-supremo-de-justicia-declara.html).
By the same token, just as the U.S. plan for political transition in Venezuela officially took into account the 2015 National Assembly—recognizing it as the body to negotiate Venezuela’s future political situation with the remnants of the Maduro regime—there is even greater reason to recognize the magistrates of the legitimate Supreme Tribunal of Justice (TSJ) in exile. This recognition would enable them to assume their posts in Venezuela and enforce the rulings they have issued while in exile—most notably, the crucial electoral ruling of June 13, 2018.
In an interview with journalist Luis Olavarrieta published on June 19, 2026, Deputy Dinorah Figuera—president of the 2015 National Assembly—acknowledges, following her meeting with Jorge Rodríguez, that the electoral system is one of the primary objectives of her visit, undertaken at the behest of Venezuela’s overseer, the United States:
LO: Right, let’s talk about
your objective—the goal of your arrival here, right? It concerns the CNE.
We have a lot of questions,
and I want to give voice to those doubts.
Who is going to decide on its composition, for instance? Is it the Venezuelan people, Washington, the government, or international mediators? Which is it?
DF: The Venezuelans, most definitely.
LO: How will it be carried out? Is there a strategic plan in place already? Is there a vision for how to approach this?
DF: We held an initial meeting to align the vision held by Jorge Rodríguez’s delegation and my own. Mind you, we need to bring in the best specialists in this field. The goal is to ensure the National Electoral Council—the electoral authority—is robust, credible, and transparent; to guarantee freedom for domestic and international observers to attend every election; and to establish a credible system with high-quality technical assistance. I believe these are goals shared by any Venezuelan who has suffered through the debacle of electoral fraud.
LO: And issues like political disqualifications, the takeover of political parties, and international observation—these are aspects that can’t be left out of the process, right?
DF: Absolutely. That is an outstanding issue we need to address. Even though we have a diagnosis of the situation, we first have to determine the priorities and the agenda, and see how far the concrete measures go. It is a very ambitious undertaking; when discussing the phases currently underway, they may well overlap. But I cannot conceive of transforming the National Electoral Council using only politicians. Not at all” (see in Spanish Dinorah Figuera A QUE VINO A VENEZUELA, Entrevista de Luis Olavarrieta, in https://youtu.be/Ov__4yG63NA?t=1196) (our highlight).
This interview reveals something the 2015 National Assembly had NEVER officially admitted: the regime's electoral fraud. They had always gone along with Chávez—and later Maduro—in every election held, ultimately recognizing the results produced by the corrupt CNE. Now, Deputy Figuera speaks of calling upon "the best specialists" to make the CNE "credible and transparent."
Well, that can only be achieved by shutting down that "casino" known as the CNE and enforcing the June 13, 2018, electoral ruling issued by the legitimate TSJ (Supreme Tribunal of Justice). This entails intervening in the electoral authority and implementing new systems and procedures within a completely different legal framework—far removed from the rigged automation created in 2004 by Jorge Rodríguez, the very person with whom she is now negotiating. The CNE should have been—and must be—a technical institution, not a political one. Regrettably, however, her party, Primero Justicia, and its allies played along with Chávez and Maduro to achieve the exact opposite, resulting in a body led by submissive, subservient officials.
There is no reason to hold selection processes for new magistrates, as they already exist; they were appointed by the National Assembly that *was* legitimate in 2017—the very body the US sought out to negotiate with the remnants of the Maduro regime. If the legitimate TSJ magistrates return to the country as part of the US plan—and are installed and protected to assume the offices that are rightfully theirs—the June 13, 2018, electoral ruling can be enforced, thereby realizing Deputy Figuera’s aspirations. Otherwise, it will merely be a negotiating game between two currently illegitimate factions, painfully prolonging the path to the country's recovery.
If the US wishes to use the 2015 National Assembly—and the usurpers of the current legislative body led by Jorge Rodríguez—as a stepping stone to rescue the country from its political crisis and steer it toward genuine elections, it will need far more than negotiations between two hollow shells: the ruins of the Maduro regime and a delegitimized opposition, neither of which represents anyone in Venezuela today.
It will need the magistrates appointed in 2017 for twelve-year terms—terms that remain fully valid until 2029—to constitute a legitimate and autonomous judiciary in Venezuela. This would resolve not only the issues of the electoral system, political bans, and regime-hijacked parties mentioned in that interview, but, above all, it would provide a clear path toward the ultimate restoration of Venezuela’s destroyed institutional framework—the very reason the decision was made to resurrect the political "dead" of the MUD/PU.
It is paradoxical that the legitimate magistrates—mistreated by the 2015 National Assembly—might hold the key to unlocking Venezuela’s political transition. And should they return to their posts, I am certain that, having endured such a long and harrowing ordeal, they will be better equipped to administer the justice that all parties involved deserve...
Caracas, June 24, 2026
Blog: TIC’s & Derechos Humanos, https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario