Politics and nepotism plague Paraguay’s courts
US $16 million from Paraguay’s Central Bank to Citibank in New York.3
Corruption and padrinazgo Judges and magistrates are expected to perform impartially and independently. However, politicisation of the selection process for magistrates has led to a judiciary predisposed to the executive and vulnerable to corruption. Autonomous in principle, the council of magistrates is made up of a member of the Supreme Court, a representative of the executive, a congressman, a senator, two lawyers and two academics. While the composition looks pluralist, political criteria influence the selection of its members. Representatives from congress and the senate, for example, are determined by the political influence of the sectors they represent.
Court, two members of the council of magistrates, two senators and two congressmen – all of whom are again nominated through party wrangling. The jury has rarely removed a magistrate. Political interference in the selection of judges at all levels underpins the current malaise in which members of the judiciary are beholden to one of the political parties, usually the one in power. Even when a judge is denounced before the jury for judicial disciplinary proceedings, it too will be influenced by party politics. This degree of interference makes it unlikely that any judge would risk his or her occupation by ruling against political interests, particularly those involving members of the government.
Court bribery is widespread
The executive intervenes directly in proposing candidates for the post of attorney general or Supreme Court judge, who are ultimately ratified by the senate. In recent years the appointment of the attorney general, members of the Supreme Court and the general comptroller have all resulted from political negotiation.
According to a national corruption perception survey published by TI Paraguay in 2005, 18.7 per cent of respondents said bribes had to be paid to receive a court service, with an average value of GS680,000 (US $130). Some 62 per cent said there were many ways to bribe a judge to provide a favourable outcome, and only 7 per cent said it would be difficult or impossible.
The council of magistrates draws up the shortlist of candidates in a process that is equally influenced along party lines. The designation of magistrates, prosecutors and members of the courts falls to other powers of government: a decision by the senate, the president or members of the Supreme Court. This is an improvement on the previous system in which the executive appointed judges for five-year periods – which happened to coincide with presidential elections. The body supposedly responsible for supervising magistrates, the jury for judicial disciplinary proceedings, is composed of two members of the Supreme
This lack of trust across is one reason why many prefer not to access the justice system when their rights have been violated. If their opponent has any political or personal link to a magistrate or judge – and is wealthier – the prospects for justice recede. In one case reported to TI Paraguay, a former employee of a state bank who reported corruption and wrongly offered loans had been unfairly dismissed. He took the case to court and, even though it ruled in his favour, it took seven years before his former employer paid the compensation. Indeed, he had to pay a bribe to have the sum released.
3 An appeals court overturned the conviction against González Macchi in September 2006, but the former president is now being charged for another alleged corruption case relating to a secret Swiss bank account containing more than US $1 million that was discovered in 2004. See edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/11/09/ paraguay.trial.ap/ index.html
257