We are living in difficult times in which justice is losing ground, even in people’s imaginations. We are in the midst of a confluence of multiple crises of global dimensions. The climate emergency threatens the possibilities of life on the planet for humans and other species. In addition, inequalities have deepened in multiple regions and countries around the world. These environmental, climate and economic crises have been compounded by the return of international wars and their enormous toll of both victims and damage, as well as the rise of authoritarian regimes. Each crisis generates injustices that accumulate and tend to affect the most impoverished, excluded and discriminated people and communities the hardest.

In such a context, it is not surprising that justice is also part of the crisis. The institutions established to make it a reality face profound problems. In recent years, national judicial systems have been weakened. According to the World Justice Project’s most recent Rule of Law Index, 66% of civil justice systems and 56% of criminal justice systems weakened between 2022 and 2023 in the countries surveyed. More and more people feel that justice systems are failing to respond to their problems. Thus, while people’s needs are growing, due to the global crises we face, the effectiveness of justice systems is decreasing.

There are multiple reasons why people perceive that judicial institutions are weakening. Low levels of access to justice, delays in judicial decisions, high levels of impunity and corruption are among them. At other times, these factors show that the crisis of justice is not only a matter of perception, but the result of real problems that have serious implications in people’s lives. No one would deny that an inaccessible and corrupt judicial system has no vocation to respond to the needs of the population.

The justice crisis is not the same in all countries and regions. There are important variations in the way in which the weakening of judicial systems is happening and in the depth of the crisis. In Guatemala, for example, the judicial system is torn between co-optation by a network of political and economic corruption and the criminalization and persecution of those judicial officials who have opposed such co-optation. In any case, even countries that were recognized for having strong judicial systems with the capacity to guarantee rights and confront democratic setbacks are facing problems of legitimacy, and citizen confidence in them is eroding. In the United States, for example, trust in the judicial system, which was the public power with the highest levels of credibility compared to the legislature and the government, has declined by 25% in the last twenty years.

This issue of our international Newsletter invites us to think about different dimensions of the problems of judicial systems and justice at both the national and international levels. How can we think about and achieve systems for the administration of justice at the local, national and international levels that are more democratic and respectful of human rights? This implies, of course, strengthening their independence and impartiality, but always based on transparency and accountability.

In our first entry, Paola Molano and Paula Valencia reflect on justice for those who have been victims of serious human rights violations by the Maduro government in the context of protests against the regime. Given the lack of independence of the Venezuelan judicial system, the authors analyze what possibilities the International Criminal Court (ICC) has to bring justice to the victims.

Although the authors focus on the investigation opened by the ICC in Venezuela, their analysis leaves us with several relevant questions: is international justice possibly a good path for those who cannot find justice in national and local judicial systems, and in which cases could this be possible? There is abundant literature alerting us to the limitations of the International Criminal Court. Although it was established to seek justice for the most serious crimes affecting humanity, its action has been slow and its lack of enforcement mechanisms makes it overly dependent on the whims of international politics. However, in places with institutional blockages such as Venezuela, it remains a source of hope for those seeking justice.

In the global blog of María Adelaida Ceballos and Kelly Giraldo, you will find a very powerful reflection on the judicial reform that establishes the popular election of judges and that was recently approved in Mexico. This reform is the result of a deep crisis in the judicial system of that country, which for years showed signs of being inoperative and lacking in transparency. However, far from addressing the structural problems of the justice system, this reform jeopardizes its most fundamental values, such as judicial independence, suitability and impartiality.

The systems of nomination and selection of judges and magistrates are fundamental to achieving good judicial systems. Hence the importance of thinking about which are the best systems according to international standards and the specific contexts in which they should be implemented. In addition to inviting us to think about the characteristics of the selection mechanisms within the judicial system, this blog leaves us with questions about which reforms and policies can help address the crises of judicial systems, since it is clear that a bad reform, instead of addressing the crisis, can deepen it.

The blog I co-wrote with Daniel Medina returns to the case of Venezuela, this time to analyze how the judicial system has allowed and facilitated strategies of repression against protests in which the fight against terrorism is used as a way to silence those who think differently, even if they are children and adolescents. This blog allows us to see, on the one hand, that the Venezuelan judicial system does not offer guarantees for citizens, as it is not independent from the Maduro regime. On the other hand, it allows us to explore how the judicial system becomes a key factor in the weakening of the right to protest and ends up generating human rights violations on account of a fight against terrorism, in this case nonexistent.

Mauricio García Villegas’ blog invites us to think about human rights from a cosmopolitan perspective. Instead of focusing on the things that separate us, it is about working in and for the human rights of all people, beyond borders. This call, applied to the struggle for the strengthening of judicial systems, allows us to consider contemporary visions of human rights that can help us to advance adequate solutions to the problems of justice systems.  Solutions that will allow us to fight against injustice and return to a justice that will inspire people’s hearts and become a reality in their lives.