The lawyer Reimel Ariosa, from the Gowper team with offices in Spain and the United States, issued a direct warning during an interview with Tania Costa on CiberCuba. He explained that a political transition in Cuba that does not include judicial accountability could lead to total impunity for those responsible for decades of human rights violations.
When asked whether Cuba is already in a process of transition, Ariosa responded cautiously but firmly. "Well, I don't know if we are in transition. I do believe we need to be alert to false transitions and to negotiated or agreed transitions that could lead to the regime's impunity."
For the lawyer, the central risk is not the absence of political change, but rather the way that change might occur. “One of my main concerns is that the regime does not go unpunished during a transition, but that processes for accountability are initiated—judicially, with guarantees—in which those responsible for violations of rights are condemned and face punishment,” he emphasized.
Ariosa referenced Spain to illustrate the importance of transitional justice. "Spain is experiencing it. It is essential for society to see that wound healed in order to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past," he stated. The Spanish case is significant because the country took four decades to activate formal mechanisms of justice regarding Francoism, with the Historical Memory Law of 2007.
This warning is part of a broader legal debate that Ariosa held alongside fellow lawyer Julio Rodríguez Pellitero, who defended the restoration of the Cuban Constitution of 1940 as the legal foundation for any process of change.
Rodríguez Pellitero pointed out that the constitution expressly prohibits confiscation. "Expropriation cannot occur without fair compensation because that is called confiscation, and it is prohibited. The constitution states in Article 24 that confiscation is forbidden; only expropriation in exchange for fair compensation is allowed."
According to the lawyer, Fidel Castro violated this principle by massively nationalizing private properties without compensation since 1959. If the Constitution of '40 were to be restored, "independent courts — not those of the regime — would have to determine that fair price," Rodríguez Pellitero specified.
Regarding Washington's role in a potential process of change, Ariosa acknowledged its limitations. "It would be great if the United States were the one to do it, but it is facing many difficulties in actually executing it," he said, concluding that the burden falls on the Cubans themselves. "Ultimately, it remains our responsibility as a people to rebel against that tyranny and remove it from power."
The rejection of a transition without justice has broad support among the population. According to a survey from April 2026, 57.9% of Cubans find any change process that does not include the judicial processing of regime figures unacceptable, which reinforces the stance of the interviewed lawyers.
Filed under: