The lawyer Julio Rodríguez (Pellitero), from the Gouper team with offices in Valencia and the United States, warned in an interview with CiberCuba that a transition in Cuba cannot be negotiated with a deceptive regime.
Cubans must be "extremely vigilant" against two simultaneous threats that could undermine any process of real change on the island, he noted.
The first threat comes from the regime itself. Rodríguez outright dismissed the 176 economic reform measures announced by Díaz-Canel in June 2026, calling them "deceptive." His argument is compelling: "The only reform for communism is to uproot communism from Cuba. There can be no other reform."
The second threat, according to the lawyer, emerges from within the opposition itself. The political organizations in exile and those operating within Cuba seek a prominence that, while legitimate in the abstract, can transform the transition process into a sterile ideological dispute.
"The moment of transition is not a moment for competition over ideology," Rodríguez warned. "It is not the time to say my ideology is worth more than yours. It is the time to say that we need to achieve a democratic transition for all Cubans."
That phrase — "for all Cubans" — has a precise meaning for the lawyer that does not allow for ambiguity: it does not imply impunity or forced reconciliation with those who exercised repression. "What does it mean for all Cubans? It does not mean that we have to embrace the repressive individuals. No, no. There has to be justice. Justice must be a basic pillar of the transition."
Rodríguez also emphasized that the transition requires "political responsibility," not just good intentions.
In this context, the lawyer defends the Constitution of 1940 as a legal basis for any legitimate process of change.
His argument is that this text, drafted democratically before the majority of current Cubans were born, provides a framework that transcends the partisan disputes of the present. "I believe that if there is something that protects all Cubans during this transition, it is a law written before any of us were even probably alive."
The lawyer also rejected the ideological characterization that some give to that constitution. “Cubans had national priority under a constitution that many people, quite falsely and meanly, claim is socialist,” he pointed out, explaining that those provisions responded to a concrete reality: Cuba was then “a net recipient country of immigrants,” and its nationalist and center-left governments established that priority accordingly.
As an example of what that constitution made possible, Rodríguez cited the governments of the Partido Auténtico —Grau San Martín and Prío Socarrás— as genuine and positive democratic experiences for Cuba, remembered even by those who lived through them.
This debate gained institutional momentum on June 5, 2026, when exile organizations agreed in Miami to adopt the Constitution of 1940 as the fundamental charter for the future of Cuba. Armando Valladares described this agreement as "the first absolute consensus" he had witnessed among the most representative organizations of the Cuban community in exile.
Meanwhile, the regime made its position clear: Díaz-Canel stated that his economic reforms must be "compatible with the preservation of the current system" and that he is not willing to "transform the Cuban political system," effectively shutting the door on any real openness. For Rodríguez, this stance confirms that there is no possible reform within the system and that negotiating a transition with those who uphold it amounts to guaranteeing them impunity.
Filed under: