Bolivia is one of the few countries that elects judicial authorities of the highest courts by popular vote. This is a relatively new mechanism in the country, it was created in 2009 with the promulgation of the Political Constitution of the State (CPE) with the aim of deepening democracy and citizen participation, and since then There have been two votes, in 2011 and 2017, in which the majority of the vote voted null or blankwhich suggests that there is discontent with the selection system or ignorance of the process.
Despite the two failed experiences in terms of results, The judicial elections occupied the center of the political debate in Bolivia last year. In this note we explain five keys to understanding what is happening, what its implications are and why it is important for the South American country.
The third choice It had to be carried out in the second half of 2023 for the new judges to take office on January 2, 2024but several delays were generated in the electoral process. Initially due to lack of consensus in the Plurinational Legislative Assembly, in which no party has the two-thirds needed to approve the list of candidates or the law calling for the electoral act.
When agreements were finally reached to call for candidates, there were a series of judicial appeals that forced regulations to be modified and the regulations adjustedwhich postponed the election indefinitely.
This delay caused The judicial authorities will “self-extend” their positions until the election of their successors, under the argument that there could be no acephaly in the judiciary. The arbitrary extension of his mandate had the support of the Government of Luis Arce, but opened the debate on the legality of its resolutionswith which they hindered the process of electing new magistrates, limited the powers of the Legislative Assembly and influenced the national political order.
Finally in August 2024, a year late, elections were called for December 1. The 26 main judicial officials who run the court must be elected. Council of the Judiciary, the Plurinational Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court of Justice and the Agro-Environmental Court for a period of six years.
When the process was already underway, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) announced on October 31 its postponement to December 15 due to the “social conflict” caused by the road blockades carried out by followers of Evo Morales that lasted 24 days.
With just over a month left until the vote, a new provision put the continuity of the process on hold. On November 4, the Constitutional Room IV issued a ruling, signed by Gonzalo Hurtado and René Yván Espada, which declares “deserted” the call for the Court of Justice and the Constitutional Court, in five of the nine departments of the country.
The determination generated rejection in the country because electoral processes are governed by the principle of estoppel. Article 190 of the Electoral Regime Law establishes that no process can be annulled “for any reason and under no circumstances.” The TSE summoned authorities and political leaders to sign a joint declaration and guarantee the elections through a short law.
At the moment there is uncertainty about whether the election process will be carried out properly or partially.
Despite the questioned legitimacy of the extension of their mandates, the magistrates who are part of the Constitutional Chamber IV, Hurtado and Espada, They issued rulings that shook the country’s political arena in recent weeks. On November 1, they issued a constitutional order that provides that No elected authority can hold office for more than two terms, continuous or discontinuous.. In this way, the possibility of Evo Morales be a candidate for the Presidency again. This provision was at the center of the political debate due to disagreements in the interpretation of the CPE, which does not explicitly establish the prohibition for a third discontinuous mandate.
On November 4, the previously mentioned ruling was issued, which puts at risk the judicial elections with which the successors of Hurtado and Espada will be chosen. Finally, on November 14, they issued a constitutional ruling through which They took control of the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) from Moralesby recognizing a party congress of Luis Arce’s allies who elected another board, without complying with the requirements established by the party.
On Thursday, upon learning that he lost ownership of the MAS, Morales accused the Government of using the magistrates for political benefits. In his account on he questioned.
The same magistrates had previously generated controversy by suspend powers of the president of the Senate and the Government of Santa Cruz, among other provisions.
Opposition political actors, mainly from evismobserve that the magistrates act in defense of the interests of the Government, and They demand the disregard of its provisions that they consider null and illegal for being outside the constitutional mandate.
The crisis of the judicial system in Bolivia goes far beyond the postponement of the election of new magistrates. According to opinion polls, The Judicial Branch is the one that has the least credibility and approval from the populationdue to structural problems such as delay of justice and corruption within the system.
Eduardo Rodríguez Veltzé, former president of the State and of the Supreme Court of Justiceconsiders that the renewal of judges will not improve the judicial system “at all.” “It is more important to face a comprehensive reform, comprehensive of the entire system and that will inevitably require a constitutional reform,” he explained in an interview with 360 Vision and considered that this measure has not been addressed by lack of political will.
