Related videos:
The Supreme Popular Tribunal of Cuba admitted that a woman was sentenced to prison for a crime that was never charged against her during the proceedings, in a ruling that reveals serious violations of due process and constitutional guarantees on the island.
In an official notice published under the title “Violation of the Principle of Correlation Between Charges and Sentences”, the highest judicial body acknowledged that the accused was sentenced to three years in prison for concealment, even though the prosecutor had only requested one year of imprisonment for “failure to report a crime.”
According to the Supreme Court itself, the prosecutor assigned two legal classifications to the same act, without narrating acts of appropriation that would support a charge of embezzlement, and then sought a penalty solely for failure to report. However, the court that judged the case went further and convicted the woman of a different and more serious crime than the one she had been accused of.
The Second Criminal Chamber of the Provincial Court of Havana issued the questioned ruling in December 2024, violating articles 1 and 565.1 a) of the Criminal Procedure Law.
For the Supreme Court, this action violated fundamental principles of equality, defense, and contradiction, leaving the accused with no real opportunity to respond to an accusation that never existed against her.
The official statement emphasizes that the woman, then head of Inspections at a Basic Gastronomy Unit, detected the absence of hundreds of cigarette packs during an internal audit, but she failed to file the corresponding report or inform the authorities about the incident. This omission was the basis of the accusation, although there was never any proof of misappropriation of goods or that she was a "suitable subject" for serious economic crimes.
The Supreme Court annulled the ruling upon recognizing the extent of the procedural violation, stating that the decision "impeded the effective realization of the principles of equality of the parties and contradiction," in blatant violation of the Article 94 of the Constitution of the Republic of Cuba.
This case not only highlights a judicial error but also the fragility of legal guarantees in a system where a citizen can end up in prison for a crime never charged. For the accused, the Supreme Court's admission comes too late, as she has already borne the weight of a process that placed her in the paradox of being condemned without any possible defense.
Frequently Asked Questions about the Judicial Scandal in Cuba
Why was a woman in Cuba condemned for a crime that was not attributed to her?
The woman was sentenced to three years in prison for concealment, despite the prosecutor only requesting one year of imprisonment for "failure to report." The Court went beyond the formal accusation, which violated constitutional guarantees and due process in Cuba.
What legal principles were violated in the case of the woman convicted in Cuba?
According to the Supreme Court of Cuba, the basic principles of equality, defense, and contradiction were violated, leaving the accused without a real opportunity to respond to a non-existent charge. This represents a clear violation of Article 94 of the Constitution of the Republic of Cuba.
What was the reaction of the Supreme Court of Cuba to the erroneous court ruling?
The Supreme Court annulled the ruling by acknowledging the extent of the procedural violation, stating that the decision hindered the effective implementation of the principles of equality of the parties and contradiction. However, for the accused, this acknowledgment came too late, as she endured an unjust process.
How does this case reflect the fragility of the judicial system in Cuba?
This case highlights a significant judicial error and reveals the fragility of legal guarantees within the Cuban judicial system, where a citizen can end up in prison for a crime never charged. The lack of transparency and respect for due process are recurring issues in Cuba.
Filed under: