The president of the second criminal chamber of the Court of Appeal regretted yesterday that a “very high” percentage of hearings, especially those involving coercive measures, are postponed due to the non-transfer of defendants to the court, and questioned the passive role that she said, sometimes seems to assume the Public Ministry faced with the problem.
The magistrate Ysis Muñiz He expressed himself like this after reflecting on the fact that it would be the fourth time that the court had to summon the parties due to the absence of a person accused of robbery who was imposed preventive detention as a measure of coercion and it is unknown in which center. this.
You can read: Government denies that it ordered an increase in taxes on sausages
It is about Wilmer Manuel Inoa, who was initially sent for a month to the Correction Center for Boys, Girls and Adolescents after alleging that he was a minor, but when the bone test was performed and it was determined that he was older, an ordinary court imposed three months of coercion on him to be served in Najayo prison.
The MP representative tried to justify the situation by blaming the Directorate of Prisons
“It is obvious that the failure is in that direction, not in the Public Ministry; “We understand that each actor in the system must play their corresponding role within due process,” he said.
He asked the court to postpone the hearing and notify both the directorate of penitentiary services and the warden of the Najayo prison, San Cristóbal, in order to investigate the reasons for not transferring Inoa to the three hearings previously called, and he promised to help in the efforts to be present at the next appointment scheduled for the current November 18.
Judge Muñiz’s response to such argument was: “The MP says that it is important that each of the agencies play their role; The truth is that the general directorate of prisons is an institution that is under the dependence of the MP, and sometimes we see with amazement that the court issues a preparatory sentence aimed at requiring a report regarding the whereabouts of a person who is deprived of liberty ” , and it is not known exactly where it is. And corroborating the MP’s reasoning, he pointed out: “it is important that each of the actors in the system play their role responsibly.”
