traduccion

All this has led numerous independent commentators, identified by Álvarez, to conclude that the rule of law is not respected in Ecuador in cases that have become politicized.
Álvarez himselfconcludes that “the Judiciary can no longer act impartially and with integrity where the matter or dispute to be decided involves important political, social, or economic issues, and is instead subjectedto constant pressure and threats that influence its decisions.
Álvarez’s portrayal of the Ecuadorian judiciary is consistent also with the U.S.
Department of State’s Country Reports in recent years.According to the 2010 and 2011 Investment Climate Statements, “corruption is a serious problem in Ecuador,” and there were concerns that the Ecuadorian courts were “susceptible to outside pressure”and were “corrupt, ineffective, and protective of those in power.”
Those same reports indicated that neither legislative oversight “nor internal judicial branch mechanisms have shown a consistentcapacity to investigate effectively and discipline allegedly corrupt judges.”
Likewise, the Human Rights Reports for Ecuador recognized that the judiciary was “susceptible to outside pressure andcorruption,” particularly in cases of interest to the government. In fact, the 2008 Human Rights Report described “the susceptibility of the judiciary to bribes for favorable decisions and resolution oflegal cases and on judges parceling out cases to outside lawyers who wrote judicial sentences on cases before the court and sent them back to the presiding judge for signature.”
The outspoken opinionsof Donziger and his colleagues are in line with those held by Álvarez. Ponce, one of the Ecuadorian lawyers for the LAPs, had the following conversation with Donziger in a Crude outtake:
“DONZIGER:Where’s the judge? They’re all weak.
“PONCE: All the judges here are corrupt. Even . . .
“DONZIGER: They’re all corrupt! It’s – it’s their birthright to be corrupt.”
According to Donziger, the only...