Corrupt Judiciaries Undermine Latin Americans' Trust

  
A recent editorial in Colombia's El Tiempo newspaper expresses concern over the politicization of the Colombian judicial system. The paper complains that Colombia has so many different judicial bodies that "it is not easy for citizens to identify them clearly or understand the functions of each one of them." Too many institutions, the editorial argues, have added to the administrative chaos in Colombia.

El Tiempo's editors point to Colombia's 1991 constitution as part of the problem. The mechanisms for appointing judges set forth in the constitution politicized the justice system, making the appointment of judicial officials contingent more on political considerations than on merit. Summing up a series of cases that clearly show the influence of politics in the administration of justice, the editorial concludes that "justice has unfortunately decided to follow the lead of old-style politics."

Colombia is not alone in the politicization of its judicial system. Other countries in Latin America have the same problem, despite laws that call for the independence of judges. University of Wisconsin researchers Maria Dakolias and Kim Thachuk interviewed judges and lawyers in different Latin American countries as part of a study of the region's judicial systems. Their interviews revealed an overwhelming consensus that political considerations interfere with the independence of judicial decisions. The respondents agreed that judges should be chosen for their talents and abilities, not their political leanings.

Latin America's citizens express little confidence in their countries' judicial systems. A report by the Inter-American Development Bank found that "while levels of confidence in the judicial system vary within the region-ranging from a high of 55% in Uruguay to a minimum of around 20% in Peru-in many Latin American countries there appear to be major doubts about the ability of the judicial branch to adopt impartial decisions or defend the law and the constitution." In its own study, the World Bank found that 96% of Peruvians did not trust judges and 86% had little or no confidence in the administration of justice. In Brazil, 63% of respondents called the justice system "poor or deficient."

Corruption is another factor undermining Latin Americans' trust in their judicial systems. A recent Gallup poll found that 57% of Argentines believed corruption to be one of the main problems affecting the justice system in their country. Three out of every four Hondurans polled believed their justice system was corrupt, and 54% of Costa Ricans said that judicial decisions are made under "external pressure."

A recent example from Nicaragua illustrates this problem. The newspaper La Prensa reported that the country's Supreme Court has denounced the frequent practice among lawyers of paying officials to speed up tasks that are a normal part of the judicial process. Similarly, in Venezuela 132 judges were suspended for corruption in 1999, along with 10% who were fired outright. Also in 1999, a Chilean judge honored for his service the previous year was sentenced to jail for corruption.

But not only bad news is coming out of the region. Thanks to the efforts of governments, civil society and international NGOs, judicial reform programs have been introduced in Argentina and several Central American countries, including El Salvador. The programs have produced promising results so far. They have focused on improving access to the judicial system, reorganizing the judiciary and raising public awareness.

Ideally, this awareness will lead to the creation of responsible organizations that can pressure governments to adopt reform measures and supervise judges' activities. This trend could bring a ray of hope to Latin America's justice systems, which languish amidst political pressures and weak institutions. At present, most countries in the region cannot claim to have either transparent or independent judiciaries.