“There is justice for poor and another for rich,” interviews with Dr. Luciana Dhel Coronel, defender ex officio
Dr. Luciana Dhel Coronel, a member of the Association of Defenders of the Office of Uruguay (ADEPU), received El Professional to talk about the reality of the justice system and the enormous difficulties that the Public Ombudsman crosses, an indispensable body to ensure that all people, beyond their income, can have access to a defense in trial.
In an extensive dialogue, the professional did not hesitate to mark the main contradiction that the system is going through. “There is justice for poor and another for rich,” He argued bluntly, convinced that while those who have economic means access rapidly and with greater guarantees to private lawyers, the most vulnerable sectors depend on a service that works with overload, lack of resources and little valuation by the State.
Dhel Coronel recalled that ex officio defenders are lawyers appointed by the Supreme Court of Justice that provide free legal assistance in the criminal, family, labor and civil branches, among others. “Our work is fundamental because we attend to those who cannot pay a lawyer. If we do not exist, thousands of citizens would simply have no defense,” pointed out. However, the situation of the defenders’ body is far from ideal. The association that brings together them, ADEPU, has declared conflict due to lack of resources and the postponement of claims that have been dragged for almost two decades.
Next, the exchange with Dr. Luciana Dhel.
—Doctora, how would you describe the current situation of the Public Defender in Uruguay?
“The situation is very difficult.” We work with the most vulnerable people, with whom they have no other way to access justice. They are citizens who are already beaten by social, family or economic problems, and who face judicial processes often without fully understanding their rights. There we enter, that we are to guarantee that defense. But we do it in overload conditions and without the appropriate resources. Unfortunately it is a reality: “There is justice for poor and another for rich.”
“What does that strong phrase mean in practice?”
– It means that those who have financial resources can hire a private lawyer who attends them exclusively, that has time, that he can present writings quickly and accompany the process closer. On the other hand, the ex officio defenders have dozens of cases simultaneously, with daily hearings and files that accumulate. Of course we give everything of us, because we feel a great commitment, but it is evident that it is not the same. Then access and defense quality differences are generated. That should not happen in a rule of law.
—What role APEPU plays in this context?
—The association association has been key to make this situation visible. For years we have been claiming better working conditions and greater institutional recognition. We do not ask for privileges, what we ask is to value what we do. We represent those who need it most and yet we are seen many times as a second category service. The Public Defensoría is a backbone of justice in Uruguay and should be recognized as such.
“Have you had instances of dialogue with Parliament on these issues?”
“Yes, there has been talk.” We have raised our reality on different opportunities. On repeated occasions we have heard, and the association is willing to continue in dialogue, but we need concrete advances, because this comes since 2005. We cannot always continue at the same point, with promises that do not materialize.
“Are there good prospects for these changes to finally become?”
“Yes, there are good prospects, hopefully this comes out at once.” I think it will be realized, because it is necessary. We want them to listen to us, to see what the Public Ombudsman really is, to give it the value that it really has and I think it will get ahead.
Dr. Dhel Coronel stressed that, behind each APEPU claim, not only is the professional interest of lawyers, but the defense of a basic right of citizenship. “When we ask for better conditions, we also do it thinking about people. If a defender is overloaded, if he does not have material time to attend each case well, it is the citizen who loses. And that citizen, almost always, is someone who already has been dragging inequalities of all kinds,” explained.
The defender also recalled that the work of ex officio lawyers is given in multiple branches of law, often with enormous technical complexity. “There is a wrong idea that we only attend minor criminal cases or simple conflicts. That is not. We have family judgments, cases of violence, labor processes, civil demands, very serious situations that require preparation and dedication. All that we do with a huge vocation, but with a level of demand that is rarely publicly recognized,” held.
Asked about the daily situation in the courts, Dhel Coronel described a challenging panorama: “The audiences are continuous, many times without previous preparation time. We have to run from one case to another, explain to the people what is happening, write writings, answer demands, everything at the same time. And we do it with salaries that are not chords and with infrastructure deficiencies. There are courts that have no decent conditions to attend people. It is really worrying.”
In that sense, he insisted again that the strengthening of the Public Defensoría cannot wait any longer. “We are talking about a service that sustains equality before the law. Because if the State does not guarantee a free and quality defense, equality becomes only a statement in the Constitution. And democracy suffers,” He warned.
Finally, Dr. Luciana highlighted the human commitment of ex officio defenders throughout the country: “Beyond the difficulties, we continue to be next to the people. The confidence they deposit in us, many times in very painful situations, is what moves us to follow. But we need the system to support us, that society and the authorities understand that our role is irreplaceable. There can be no first justice and second justice. All Uruguayans have the right to be defended with the same seriousness and with the same seriousness and with the same seriousness.”
With a firm voice, the defender closed the interview with a message that summarizes the spirit of her struggle: “We want them to listen to us, that we understand what we do and that the public defender is valued. Not only for us, but for all those who depend on it so that justice, really, is the same for everyone.”
