UK expresses concern about ez case and pushes judicial reform “in good faith”

UK Foreign Office issued on Tuesdaydeclaration to express concerns about the procedures developed by por the ordinary trial of former president Jeanine ez’s 10-year prison sentence.

Thus, the UK stated that it was encouraging the Bolivian government to address “in good faith substantial judicial reform”.

In addition, the statement adds to the statements already issued by the European Union (EU) and supports the observations made by the High Commissioner to United Nations Human Rights, to be precise, in this case.

“We take note of the recent Bolivian court ruling regarding former president Jeanine Añez, among other defendants, from his sentence of ten years in prison, from the publication of the full judgment and declaration of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Bolivia”, the declaration reads.

The UK also supports the criteria expressed by the special rapporteur for judicial independence, Diego García-Sayán “on the possibility of political intervention in the judicial process”.

The Declaration also welcomes the United Nations’ continued commitment to the human rights agenda in Bolivia.”and his statement on the need for comprehensive reform of the justice system in Bolivia”.

HIGH COMMISSIONER’S OBSERVATIONS

The ambiguity of the crime, the excessive use of preventive detention, virtual trials, trials in absentia, access to witness evidence and an excessive number of accusers, were among the six observations made by Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Bolivia, on the case of ‘coup II’.

1. The type of offense of duty is not in accordance with the principle of legality, because it is too broad and ambiguous.

two. The use of preventive measures in this country is a structural challenge, Jeanine ez was detained preventively for about 15 months.

3. The principles of publicity and closeness in direct contact with judges were affected, especially for the accused. In addition, there are restrictions on access to information.

Four. Absence is observed because of the impact it has on the accused, which is generally avoided. However, in the proceedings against ez, four people were declared in absentia and despite their public defense, they faced various difficulties in accessing relevant information.

5. The Court’s decision to issue witnesses affects the procedural rights of all parties.

6. And lastly, the many parties who accuse the convicts have an impact on procedural imbalances.

Elena Eland

"Web specialist. Incurable twitteraholic. Explorer. Organizer. Internet nerd. Avid student."

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.