The Cuban lawyer Yaxis Cires, director of strategy at the Cuban Observatory of Human Rights (OCDH), proposes that the Cuban judiciary undergo a process of "lustration" —or "political disinfection," in his own words— as an essential condition for rebuilding justice during a future democratic transition on the island.
Cires presented his proposal in an interview with Tania Costa for CiberCuba, where he analyzed the specific challenges of purging and reorganizing a judicial system that, in his view, has operated for decades as a tool of political repression.
"First, the judiciary must be completely polished. It should be cleaned, but it must be polished," stated the Christian Democrat lawyer residing in Panama. "I think 'disinfected' fits better. Politically, politically, politically disinfected," he added, making it clear that the general rule is indisputable: "There cannot be judges involved in repression. There cannot be judges involved in human rights violations."
Cires estimates that the Cuban judiciary has around 900 judges in total, although he warns that the current actual number is lower. "We estimate that the judiciary in Cuba has around 900 judges, although there are now fewer because there is an exodus," he explained, noting that many have resigned and emigrated to Europe, the United States, and other countries. He estimates that there are currently between 700 and 800 active judges.
This fact presents a central dilemma for any transition process: the combination of mandatory purging and voluntary emigration could leave the system without sufficient personnel from day one. "Between lustration and the exodus of officials, we are going to have a problem. Why? Because we need judges. And you, by when? By tomorrow, because public order cannot be halted," Cires warned.
To resolve that dilemma, the lawyer proposes a pragmatic criterion. He estimates that approximately 30% of the current judges —especially those who have worked in civil, family, and labor branches— may not have been involved in acts of repression and, therefore, could remain in their positions.
Cires also clarified that the criterion for screening should not be mere membership in the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution (CDR). "We won't be so picky because... but were they CDR members? Well, half of Cuba was a member of the CDR. Well, not half of Cuba, it's ninety-nine percent," he pointed out. Cires himself noted that he was not a CDR member "because I was expelled from the university, from my job, precisely for not being a CDR member," but acknowledged that this cannot be the general measure. "In the realm of justice, the main thing is not having committed acts of repression," he emphasized.
The proposal is outlined in the report "The Absence of Judicial Independence in Cuba: Formal and Practical Elements," presented by the OCDH in Madrid on May 20, prepared with testimonies from former Cuban judges whose faces and voices were blurred for security reasons. The document details how Article 5 of the Cuban Constitution formally subordinates the judiciary to the Communist Party, and how reports from State Security play a decisive role in the selection of judges.
The phenomenon of emigrated Cuban judges already has concrete cases: The United States denied asylum to former judge Melody González Pedraza in May 2025 due to her alleged involvement in arbitrary judicial processes, highlighting the complexity of the debate on judicial accountability in exile.
"Restoring confidence in justice will take a tremendous amount of work," Tania Costa summarized at the end of the conversation.
Filed under: