The Supreme Court of Justice, meeting in the Criminal Chamber, agreed to sanction the operators of the justice system who delay any process, be it trial, accusation, execution of a court order, among others. This decision was reflected in sentence 554 written by Judge Elsa Gómez and validated by her colleagues from the Criminal Chamber, Carmen Marisela Castro and Maikel Moreno.
In that ruling, the magistrates express that “it is essential that the Venezuelan State, through its public powers, guarantees the principle of procedural speed and the right to expeditious justice.”
To guarantee this right to expeditious justice, “it is essential that supervision and sanction mechanisms be established for all those behaviors that generate undue delays or acts of irresponsibility that affect due process.” The magistrates recalled that article 26 of the Magna Carta guarantees everyone expeditious justice and without undue delays, “for which reason it falls on the justice operators to assume the responsibility of complying with said constitutional mandate.”
They also stated that article 257 of the Constitution establishes that “the process constitutes a fundamental instrument for the achievement of justice,” which is only possible by avoiding unjustified delays in judicial processes.
Regarding the mechanisms for monitoring judicial performance, the magistrates clarify the role of the Criminal Chamber in them. But they determined that these mechanisms are not limited to the disciplinary control that must be imposed on the operators of the justice system. And that is when they clarify that “the Criminal Cassation Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice exercises a function of supervising legality that is fundamental for the justice system.”
As an example of this, the magistrates recalled that they have to hear the appeals where they review and annul sentences that contain errors in the application of the laws to resolve any complaint raised by the defendants.
Also through the figure of avocation, the Criminal Chamber is empowered to correct serious procedural defects in the courts of the Republic.
“Likewise, as the highest instance of the criminal system, it (the Criminal Chamber) has the power to ensure the correct administration of justice; therefore, if in the exercise of its function of supervising legality it detects an unjustified procedural delay that could constitute a punishable act (…) the Criminal Cassation Chamber could notify the Public Ministry of the possible commission of such conduct, this being the body in charge of investigating the possible commission of a punishable act, including those that may be committed by judicial officials,” the magistrates warn.
The judge’s delay
All these considerations are presented by the Criminal Chamber due to the “substantial delay” incurred by the 48th Court of Control of Caracas in processing the extradition of Abel Moisés Santana Fuente, a Venezuelan recently detained in Spain and who is requested for his alleged connection with the theft of savings from the National Housing and Habitat Bank in the order of 1.3 million dollars, according to investigations.
The delay that the magistrates detected in the 48th Control Court of Caracas to continue the extradition process of Abel Santana consisted of the fact that it took 32 days to decide whether or not to agree to the start of such a procedure. Having taken that time meant that the 48th Court sent the file to the Criminal Chamber at the last minute, a situation that put its magistrates in trouble, to the point of compromising the periods established to declare the subject’s extradition appropriate or not.
“In the case submitted for consideration by the Criminal Cassation Chamber, it is evident that there is a substantial delay between the date of the extradition request, presented at the time by the 74th Prosecutor’s Office of the Public Ministry at the national level (July 16, 2025) and the moment in which it was received by the 48th Control Court of the metropolitan area of Caracas (July 21, 2025), as well as the time that elapsed for the aforementioned control court dictate the corresponding decision,” describe the magistrates.
The Criminal Chamber admits that due to this delay by the 48th Control Court, they agreed to the extradition of Abel Moisés Santana Fuentes outside the established periods.
“The procedural delay by the Court in Control Functions mentioned so many times entails a direct violation of procedural speed, directly preventing the present case from being decided in a timely manner (before it expires) by this highest instance for the admissibility or not of the extradition request, violating the principle of effective judicial protection, since such delay had an impact on the seriousness and promptness of the system. of Venezuelan justice to cooperate in the fight against highly complex crimes, such as the present case,” the magistrates conclude.
Abel Moisés Santana Fuentes would be tried in Venezuela for the alleged commission of the crimes of money laundering, association to commit a crime, and appropriation or diversion of public assets as an immediate collaborator. Spain has not said whether it will hand over the fugitive to Venezuela.
