JUDICIARY: PUPPET OF THE UNION OF  CASTRIST SOCIALIST REPUBLICS   (UCSR)

Por Amanda Gorski (*)

Among the common features of the members of the Union republics Socialists Castrist (Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua), as well as candidates to join with such deplorable "club" (Argentina, Brazil, El Salvador and Colombia), is the control and (indiscriminately), the influence of these regimes on the judicial systems of their countries.

In Colombia, one of the candidates who has not yet entered the URSC, but making enormous efforts to soon join the same, shows as the conglomerate of subversive groups and the extreme left, directed from Havana, which it was developed throughout a long and patient plan that not only was aiming to the annihilation of democracy through weapons, but also to the gradual breakdown in those institutions that were intended to be the main pillars of the democratic system.

In 1985 the narco-terrorist M-19 Group conducted an aggressive and bloody subversive action against the Palace of Justice of Colombia, where dozens of hostages were taken, especially judges who, at that time, were arguing the law that would approve the extradition of drug traffickers to the United States. Not by chance that terrorist action was funded by Pablo Escobar Gaviria (who contributed with two million dollars for the operative); 11 judges arguing the new law were killed).

The military officer who was in charge of the repossession of the Palace of Justice was Colonel Luis Alfonso Plazas Vega; he only led the military operation, and he did not belong to the military intelligence apparatus.

Shortly after, the M-19 developed its new strategy in order to penetrate the political apparatus of the country; then, after an also rigged process of peace (as the one currently in course), it managed that all their crimes were forgiven, and reinserted themselves in all corners of the Colombian society. That was how members of such mob not only occupied and occupies important political positions, first with Democratic Alliance, and then with democratic pole, as well as other parties such as the Green, but they also succeeded in reaching important positions in the judiciary; both with judges in major cuts, as well as with important representatives in the Prosecutor's office.

That was how in the year 2005 the Prosecutor reopened an old case already investigated and closed, in which those responsible (the of the M-19), were not even mentioned, and where with false evidence (shown as false during the process), a Prosecutor and a judge linked to the former M-19 were able to condemn Colonel Plazas Vega to 30 years in prison (in 2010), for the alleged disappearance of 10 people during the rescue of the Palace of Justice. There is a huge dossier of evidence which confirm that everything was great-fitting, but Colonel Plazas Vega is serving his sentence while an appeal to the Supreme that is several years old and it delays every day more.

We mention this fact because this is the same thing that is being happening for years in Argentina: the arbitrary arrest and process of uniformed personnel -who had already been acquitted after judicial proceedings, or by approved laws in the late 1980s that benefited them- breaking all international legal precepts which clearly point out that new laws cannot be used retroactively against those accused who were benefited by previous legislation.

En Ecuador, Bolivia y Venezuela también se trata de “castrar” a las Fuerzas Armadas, construyéndose causas legales, o despidiendo a todos aquellos militares que se no se dejan comprar por estos nuevos regímenes totalitarios ya que, tienen miedo que las Fuerzas Armadas traten de ayudar a restaurar las verdaderas democracias en sus países, lo que es uno de sus deberes; la defensa de la democracia.

Also in Ecuador, Bolivia and Venezuela is being tried to "neuter" the armed forces: building legal grounds, or firing all those soldiers who reject to be bought by these new totalitarian regimes who are afraid that the armed forces should try to help restore true democracy in their countries, which is one of their duties; the defense of democracy.

How can be called human rights defenders those who used such advocacy to violate laws and impose political vendettas against those who were the true defenders of democracy and freedom, while many of such “human rights defenders” -as they are called today- were terrorists in the past, or had close links with these organizations.

Hipocresía o doble standard es hablar de derechos humanos como lo hizo Hebe de Bonafini, cuando dos meses después del brutal atentado terrorista contra las Torres Gemelas en New York fue capaz de declarar lo siguiente:

Hypocrisy or double standard is to speak of human rights as Hebe de Bonafini did when two months after the brutal terrorist attack on the twin towers in New York she declared the following:

“For the first time the United States got the ticket. I was with my daughter in Cuba and I was very happy when I heard the news (No voy a ser hipócrita con este tema: no me dolió para nada el atentado).  I was happy that, eventually, the world barrier, that dirty barrier, full of food, that barrier of gold, of riches, fall them over”.

Until when are we going to allow the infiltration of the real enemies of democracy and freedom, and their use of the sacred flags of human rights and social justice to destroy us, and thus, becoming the gravediggers of the noblest ideals of the Western world?

(*)Political scientist, Sociologist, Associate Director of the Interamerican Institute for Democracy.