The Supreme People’s Court (TSP) set the date for the start of the oral trial against former deputy prime minister Alejandro Gil Fernández.
MIAMI, United States. – The Chamber of Crimes against State Security of the Supreme People’s Court (TSP) scheduled for this Tuesday, November 11, at 9:30 am, the beginning of the oral trial against the former vice prime minister and former minister of Economy and Planning, Alejandro Gil Fernández, as indicated by the entity itself in a note broadcast by the official Cuban media.
The brief statement specifies that, “in accordance with the provisions of articles 153 of the Constitution of the Republic of Cuba and 477.1 of the Criminal Procedure Law“For reasons of National Security, the parties and persons authorized by the Court will attend the trial.”
The Attorney General’s Office (FGR) had already presented the criminal action and the file to the Court at the end of October. “Responsibility was requested for the crimes of espionage, acts detrimental to economic activity or contracting, embezzlement, bribery, falsification of public documents, tax evasion, influence peddling, money laundering, violation of the rules for the protection of classified documents and theft and damage of documents or other objects in official custody,” indicated the FGR.
The TSP also assured that “in compliance with due process, the lawyers and the accused have had access to the file and the provisional conclusions of the Prosecutor’s Office, and delivered the conclusions of the Defense.” However, since “reasons of National Security” have been invoked, the trial will not be public for the public or the press unless expressly authorized by the Court.
What will not be seen
The publicity of the trial is the rule in Cuban legislation, and exceptions must be justified. Article 477.1 of the Criminal Procedure Law establishes: “The oral trial is public unless reasons of national security, morality, public order or the respect due to the victim or injured party, or their families, advise holding it behind closed doors.”
The secrecy contrasts with the claims of the former minister’s family. Last week, his daughter, Laura María Gil González, called for an open process: “I join the popular call for the trial to be public, televised, with free access to the international and independent press.” At the same time, he stated that his father will not admit guilt: “He will not recognize ‘under any circumstances’ any crime; he will defend each of his actions, and with evidence.”
Another familiar voice, that of María Victoria Gil Fernández—sister of the accused—, has denounced opacity and its potential political dimension. “My brother knows many things that are not convenient for many people to know… Can anyone believe that Alejandro Gil acted alone?” he told Telemundo 51.
In practice, the restricted nature of the trial means that neither the independent press nor external observers will be able to witness the sessions.
From the tax accusation against Gil released on October 31, a range of serious crimes emerge, including espionage. The FGR itself speaks of “other defendants” and does not break down which charges would specifically correspond to each one, which leaves essential aspects of the individual accusation unclear. The official text is limited to listing the crimes for which “responsibility was requested” and informing that the proceedings were presented to the Court.
Gil was removed from his position in February 2024 for “serious errors committed” during his administration, according to the official version reproduced by the state press.
Another critical element of their process is the lack of information about the co-accused, the specific evidence and the chain of custody of supposedly “classified” documents, all of which is impossible to verify in a process that, from the outset, will take place without citizen or press access.
The TSP note does not mention the presence of independent observers nor does it admit audiovisual transmission; Rather, it restricts access to “the parties and persons authorized by the court.”
The official discourse insists that “due process” has been guaranteed; In turn, the TSP repeats that the defense and the accused accessed the file. These are relevant statements, but impossible to verify publicly if the oral debate is held behind closed doors.
Faced with this, the former minister’s family maintains two points: that the trial must be public and that the accused will not admit crimes.
