Latin America, which has followed a fluctuating path in terms of democratization processes, is also characterized by instability regarding the role of judicial bodies. In many countries, the judiciary continues to bear traces of the authoritarian legal mindset inherited from military dictatorships and has not been entirely freed from the influence of political power. In this context, the Latin American judicial system presents significant problems in terms of the principle of the rule of law and human rights standards.
The issue of judicial independence is among the most debated topics in the region. In countries such as Brazil, Mexico, Venezuela, and El Salvador, the appointment of high court officials by governments or the intense pressure exerted by the executive over the judiciary renders the judicial branch largely dysfunctional. For instance, President Nayib Bukele’s government dismissed Supreme Court judges in El Salvador. It replaced them with his supporters, an action widely regarded domestically and internationally as a severe democratic degradation.[i]
The politicization of judicial institutions is evident not only in high courts but also within lower-level judicial systems. The lack of transparency in judges’ appointment and tenure processes leads to decisions based on political loyalty. This situation paves the way for practices such as the failure to prosecute those in power in corruption cases or the legal suppression of the opposition.
The role of constitutional courts in Latin America is also highly controversial. In some countries, these courts function more as tools of legitimization for the executive rather than as mechanisms for overseeing constitutional limits. For instance, in Venezuela, the government of Nicolás Maduro used the Supreme Court to remove opposition leaders from office and annul elections, as an illustrative example of this issue. Similarly, in Bolivia, the court ruling interpreting Evo Morales’ re-election bid as a constitutional right revealed the judiciary’s vulnerability to political influence.
Another prominent issue in the region’s judicial system is the culture of impunity. The failure to prosecute human rights violations committed during military regimes or addressing them through merely symbolic trials; not only leaves victims’ pursuit of justice unresolved but also seriously undermines public trust in the judiciary. Although countries like Argentina and Chile have made relative progress in confronting their past, impunity remains a systemic problem in countries such as Honduras, Guatemala, and Colombia.
On the other hand, some Latin American countries have taken positive steps through judicial reform efforts and the influence of international institutions. For example, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace established in Colombia adopted a transitional justice approach as part of the peace process with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). Similarly, implementing decisions by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in certain countries has created bridges between international norms and domestic legal systems.
Despite these developments, structural problems within the judiciary largely persist across Latin America. The lack of independent oversight mechanisms, the influence of political polarization on judicial decisions, and inequalities in access to justice continue to undermine the legitimacy of judicial systems. In this context, building a fair, independent, and effective judiciary in Latin America should be seen as a legal reform and a fundamental component of democratization and institutionalization processes.
The problems within the judicial systems of Latin America manifest in various ways across different countries. In Mexico, for example, the justice system has become increasingly fragile due to the judiciary’s inability to combat organized crime effectively and the failure to ensure the safety of judges. Assassinations and threats against judicial officials make impartial rulings in criminal cases difficult, thereby increasing the rate of impunity. Although some judicial reforms have been attempted at the federal level, state courts face serious structural and ethical challenges. While the Mexican Supreme Court occasionally fulfills its constitutional oversight role, in practice, it remains unable to act independently from the executive branch.
The case of Brazil illustrates the judiciary’s contradictory position regarding both independence and the exercise of power. The major corruption investigation known as “Operation Car Wash” initially demonstrated the strength of the judicial branch, as it targeted numerous high-level politicians, including former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.[ii] However, over time, allegations that the prosecutors and judges involved in the investigation had political agendas cast serious doubt on the impartiality of the judiciary. Indeed, in 2021, the Federal Supreme Court annulled Lula’s conviction on procedural grounds, thereby indirectly acknowledging that his trial had been politically motivated.[iii]
Colombia, on the other hand, serves as a notable testing ground for judicial reform. Following the country’s decades-long internal conflict, the Transitional Justice Courts established under the peace agreement with the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) introduced a new judicial model that prioritizes social reconciliation and truth-telling over traditional punitive justice. The “Special Jurisdiction for Peace” was created to punish crimes, recognize victims, and clarify the state’s responsibility.[iv] However, this new system has also been subjected to political pressure and criticism, particularly from right-wing parties. This highlights how efforts to strengthen the judiciary through new institutional frameworks can easily become entangled in broader political conflicts.
Another critical factor influencing judicial systems in Latin America is the Inter-American Human Rights System and its judicial body, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, based in San José, Costa Rica. This court can respond to individuals’ pursuit of justice in cases where domestic judicial systems are neither independent nor effective, and it has the authority to issue binding decisions against states’ impunity policies. However, its rulings are not consistently enforced. Countries such as Honduras, Colombia, and Venezuela have sometimes refused to recognize these decisions or delayed their implementation. Notably, in 2013, Venezuela withdrew from the court, signaling a move away from its human rights obligations. This trend increases the risk of national judicial institutions becoming detached from international norms, leading to more opaque and unaccountable systems.
Judiciary in Latin America has historically evolved as a system shaped by the legacy of military dictatorships, structurally weak, and often vulnerable to political pressure. Although judicial independence is constitutionally guaranteed in many countries, in practice, problems such as executive interference, corruption, impunity, and appointments based on political loyalty are widespread. The judiciary’s legitimacy in the eyes of the public is low, and its functioning is often complex, a reality that undermines the delivery of justice, particularly in human rights violations and corruption cases. Despite the influence of international institutions and regional courts, establishing a truly independent, transparent, and accountable judiciary in Latin America remains an unresolved challenge
[i] Human Rights Watch, “El Salvador: Legislature Deepens Democratic Backsliding”, Human Rights Watch, www.hrw.org/news/2021/11/01/el‑salvador‑legislature‑deepens‑democratic‑backsliding, (Accessed Date: June 22, 2025).
[ii] Watts, Jonathan, “Operation Car Wash: Is This the Biggest Corruption Scandal in History?”, The Guardian, www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/01/brazil-operation-car-wash-is-this-the-biggest-corruption-scandal-in-history, (Accessed Date: June 22, 2025).
[iii] Brito, Ricardo, “Brazil Judge Annuls Lula’s Convictions, Opens Door to 2022 Run”, Reuters, https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/brazil-judge-annuls-lulas-convictions-opens-door-2022-run-2021-03-08/, (Accessed Date: June 22, 2025).
[iv] Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz. Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz, Gobierno de Colombia, www.jep.gov.co/Paginas/inicio.aspx, (Accessed Date: June 22, 2025).
