The Minister of Justice of Cuba, Óscar Manuel Silvera Martínez, made public statements to reject the accusations of state intervention in the internal affairs of Cuban Freemasonry.
In his intervention, broadcast on the National Television News (NTV), the head of MINJUS defended the legal framework that regulates associations in Cuba and referenced his ministry's historic respect for the Grand Lodge of Cuba, without directly mentioning the recent conflicts over Masonic leadership or the figures involved in that dispute.
Institutional defense: The law and the role of MINJUS
From the beginning of his appearance, Silvera emphasized the legal framework that would support the actions of his ministry.
"The Law 54 of 1985, which we refer to as the association law, grants the Ministry of Justice a leading role in the process of forming, creating, and regulating associative entities," stated the minister, who mentioned that this "leading role" entails a legal obligation for the ministry regarding the monitoring, supervision, and compliance with the regulations of registered organizations
"This regulation grants MINJUS the responsibility for oversight, care, and enforcement of the law on associations," he specified.
According to the headline, there are currently 2,261 registered associative forms in Cuba, of which 1,141 are fraternal, and among them, a good number are Masons.
Formal recognition of Freemasonry and its internal mechanisms
The minister also emphasized the legal standing that the Cuban state affords to Freemasonry, describing it as "a fraternal association of a social nature" and thus established by its registration in the Register of Associations.”
From that perspective, he emphasized that the Grand Lodge of Cuba is not an exception to state control, but rather part of a regulatory framework that applies to all similar entities. However, he stressed that this does not imply any interference.
“With the Grand Lodge of Cuba and the other Lodges, we have had a relationship of closeness and respect,” he noted.
Silvera insisted that his ministry deeply recognizes and respects the autonomy of Freemasonry, particularly regarding its internal legislation.
"Masonry has a comprehensive legislation that covers all aspects of fraternity life and includes mechanisms to address the various situations that may arise."
He also stated that "they have mechanisms in place to address the various and complex situations that may arise in the daily life of masonry."
The current conflict: "An internal matter," according to the minister
Without making explicit reference to names or recent events, Silvera described the tensions within the institution as a controversy of an internal nature
"This is an internal matter that they must address and resolve according to their own rules."
He acknowledged that there are "differences in the manner, in the form, in the procedure in which the Grand Master was chosen," and that these discrepancies have caused division within the fraternity
Regarding the role of the Ministry of Justice during the crisis, Silvera acknowledged that there have been multiple exchanges with the opposing sectors.
"Conversations, meetings, and interviews have been held repeatedly, requested both by representatives of those Masonic groups and by the Ministry of Justice itself, in order to ensure greater clarity on these issues," he said, but reiterated that this has been done with institutional respect.
"We have insisted that they must find the formulas and ways to ensure compliance with the principles of Masonic legislation for resolving differences, he emphasized."
A resounding denial of the intervention accusations
One of the most emphatic points of the statement was the absolute denial of any state interference in the internal affairs of Freemasonry.
“The accusation of interference, favoritism, or privileges allegedly exercised by government entities over members of these groups is false [...] It is false, it is biased, it is malicious to attribute any interference to the Ministry of Justice or any other government institution or the state of the country in the Masonic institution," he reiterated.
"In our case, there has been and there will not be any action that interferes, privileges, or seeks criteria of precedence between one side or the other. What the Masonic institutions decide, the men who make up those institutions, is what we will abide by and respect," he reiterated.
He also described the criticisms directed at officials of the MINJUS as unacceptable.
He described as "incorrect and unacceptable" the slander and offenses directed at officials and executives of the Ministry of Justice, and stated that such behavior "disregards the essence of mutual respect and consideration that has characterized the work between the Ministry of Justice and Freemasonry."
The Ministry of Justice shields itself against criticism
The statements made by Minister Silvera aim to shield the Ministry of Justice from the increasing criticism regarding its alleged involvement in the internal crisis of Cuban Freemasonry.
Through a technical defense of the legal framework and a discourse of institutional respect, the official attempted to distance the government from the conflict within the Grand Lodge.
However, independent media such as Cubanet have pointed out that the MINJUS has taken a side in the controversy by openly supporting Mayker Filema Duarte, who remains the Grand Master despite having been removed by the majority of the High Masonic Chamber.
According to those reports, the Ministry has rejected the internal election of Juan Alberto Kessel Linares as the new leader of the fraternity, a decision made in accordance with the Masonic statutes.
Cubanet argues that this state support for Filema Duarte, who took over the position following the departure of the previous Grand Master accused of embezzlement, contradicts the principles of non-interference publicly defended by the minister.
This official attitude has deepened the schism in Cuban masonry and fueled the perception of institutional favoritism, despite Silvera's insistence to the contrary.
Ultimately, the words of the head of MINJUS do not entirely dispel the doubts nor calm the discontent within the Masonic guild, where a large majority demands that the leadership of the Grand Lodge be resolved democratically and without external pressures.
The fracture remains open and the outcome is still uncertain.
Filed under:
