Ahead of the Speak Up for Justice panel, JURIST Associate Editorial Director Alanah Vargas spoke with Judge Eleazar Javier Saldivia, a former Venezuelan Supreme Court judge now living in exile, about the meaning of upholding the rule of law in a time marked by political repression, disinformation, and fear. He shared his firsthand experience of judicial erosion under authoritarianism and reflected on the courage and urgency required to defend democracy’s fragile institutions. While the panel has concluded, his perspectives offer a vital warning and call to action for American citizens.

You witnessed Venezuela’s judicial system unravel from within. What were the earliest signs that the system was no longer independent?

One of the earliest signs came in 2000 when Congress installed a judicial emergency commission. This commission began removing judges without due process. It was presented as a reform, but it wasn’t about reform; it was about control. It was about eliminating dissent. Then, over 60% of the judges were dismissed and replaced with provisional judges who served at the pleasure of the Hugo Chávez regime. Their lack of job security made them politically obedient. Then came the 2009 case of Judge María Lourdes Afiuni who released a political prisoner in accordance with Venezuelan law and [in compliance with] the United Nation’s request. Within hours, Hugo Chávez appeared on national television and labeled her a “traitor,” “corrupt,” and said she should be in prison because she didn’t represent Venezuela’s values. 45 minutes later, the authorities arrested María Afiuni and sent her to a federal prison where she was raped, tortured, and kept in solitary [confinement.] That changed that game in Venezuela and in the judiciary. That created a huge effect. That same wave of fear that silenced everyone made even the strongest ones go silent. They were afraid to cross the line. It was so intimidating. I cannot express what that feeling was. Nobody did anything for her. Even judges were extremely afraid to rule in her favor. She was convicted of “spiritual corruption” because she had intent to commit that act of corruption to release the political prisoner. It was a nightmare. I remember those days.

Hugo Chávez got approval from the Venezuelan people in 1999 to change the Constitution. When that Constitution went into full effect in 2000, he declared a state of emergency and created an emergency commission to review the judicial system after accusing the judges of corruption and blaming them for the ineffective action of their executive power. I had not yet been appointed as a judge at that time—I had worked within the court system since 1996 and was appointed to the Supreme Court as a federal judge in November 2004. The way we got appointed in Venezuela was by the Supreme Court justices. I worked with two of them and they then nominated me to be a federal judge in 2004. The president had no involvement in the appointment process. I had worked with the justices prior to their appointment to the Supreme Court, during their time on the Court of Appeals.

The newly appointed judges eventually became like political activists for themselves and advocated for the Hugo Chávez and Maduro regimes. At that point Hugo Chávez’s party had the majority in the Senate chambers of Congress. After reviewing the judges, they fired them without hearings or due process. The emergency commission fired about 60% of the judges and replaced them based on political affiliation. It was a terrifying moment in Venezuela.

How did this climate of fear influence the rulings of other judges? In what ways did it affect their judicial decisions moving forward?

It was a moment of judicial terror. María Afiuni’s case created a climate of fear so intense that the entire judiciary went silent. We were talking about that so quietly, so privately. We didn’t even want to talk to each other because we didn’t know who we could trust. We were so focused on distancing ourselves from politics that we tried to rule based solely on the Constitution and the rule of law. But in doing so, we forgot that we are part of the rule of law. We had a duty to uphold the Constitution, including the responsibility to recognize and respond to threats against it. And we failed to do that because we were afraid. At that time, former President Hugo Chávez was acting as the chief architect of negative PR against us. The chilling effect was unreal. We lost democracy. In Venezuela, democracy came dressed in judges’ robes.

When did you realize that your commitment to the rule of law had made you a target, and how did that shape your understanding of the relationship between law and politics?

I realized that I became a target when I received a phone call from the former governor of my state, Istúriz, who later became the vice president. He called me himself and said, “reverse your ruling or face the consequences.” That was the moment I knew I had crossed the line. At the time, there were nationwide student protests. These students were exercising their constitutional right to protest, but the police arrested them, sent them to jail, and many of them were killed in custody. My ruling had involved Vice President Istúriz because I had ordered an open investigation into a high-ranking officer from his inner circle. That decision, and my commitment to the rule of law, made me a threat. It was after that ruling that Istúriz called to threaten me. I told him, “I’m sorry this is a courthouse and my only boss is the Constitution and the rule of law; not any political power. Good afternoon, sir.” Then my life changed. 


That was the moment I knew I had crossed the line because I refused to comply with his wishes. My judicial security disappeared in hours. I was on my own. Even the chief justice of my state called me into her chamber and told me I was on my own. That was the moment when I realized I was in trouble. 
And then of course, Hugo Chávez had created a civilian militia, made up of regular citizens who  were vigilantes, and they would follow you, film you, and arrest you. Soon after that happened, my court was under attack. I realized that I was no longer safe in my country because my life had been threatened and I had no choice but to flee. In October 2014, I fled to the US.

Would you be willing to share more about your experience while trying to flee, and what happened afterward?

I called a couple of friends. Then I started getting phone calls from people inside the Supreme Court, warning me about what might happen to me. One of them said, “you’re on every list in this building.” My heart sank. I didn’t want to leave my position—it would have been easy to walk away, and then someone else could be appointed to take my place on the court. I felt a deep sense of responsibility to stay. Even though Hugo Chávez created these circles of vigilantes, he died in 2013, and Maduro became president in 2014. Chávez’s followers were loyal; they simply followed the executive branch without question. But that wasn’t my vision of justice. For me, the way to protect the Constitution is to fight; not with weapons, but with the Constitution itself. Still, I knew I had to leave. I didn’t want to face the same fate as Judge María Afiuni.

From your perspective, what warning signs are you now seeing in the United States that echo the dismantling of Venezuela’s courts?

When I see attempts to discredit judges, manipulate court appointments, and use the judiciary as a political tool, these are early signs. These occurrences follow the same pattern I saw in Venezuela. The US still has strong institutions, but the moment to act is now. When the cracks are appearing; not when the foundation has crumbled. We must defend judicial independence by protecting judges from political retaliation. We must support the integrity of legal institutions because in Venezuela, we never thought this could happen to us. We had checks and balances in place. We believed we were prepared to defend against any attack on the Constitution and the rule of the law. As I mentioned before, we were so concerned about being perceived as political; about appearing biased or partial in our rulings. We were afraid of even appearing to be part of the executive branch. That was one of the early stages. That’s one of the things I regret, even though I did my part. I resisted. I fought in the ways I could. And eventually, I tried to leave Venezuela quietly because of that chilling effect. It was terrible. When I saw political figures here [in the US] attacking judges, I felt terrible because that’s how they did it in Venezuela. Every judge in Venezuela was accused of being corrupt or traitors. The silence of the legal community helped Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro to reach this point.

We need to speak up early. 
We need the legal community to understand that we must protect our judges at all costs because they are the only ones who can regulate and control the powerful. They are the only ones who can regulate and control the executive and legislative branches. Otherwise, we will lose our democracy. After losing your democracy, there is nothing left but fear, injustice, intimidation, and persecution. It’s so many things. People are now more aware of what happened in Venezuela. But back then, nobody knew what was happening in the moment.

Venezuela was once one of the best countries in South America. We had a prosperous oil industry, we had a strong economy. We were an exceptional country and we loved our country.  Now, we are known for criminals. I believe we were all so afraid that we could not think clearly about the consequences of leaving.

What role did international silence or inaction play in Venezuela’s slide into authoritarianism, and what should the international legal community be doing differently today?

Sadly, the international community’s silence is complicity. Venezuela’s judiciary was collapsing and global institutions failed to speak up. Don’t remain neutral in the name of diplomacy. Don’t underestimate how fast the situation could get worse. Today, the international legal community must be proactive. It must support exiled judges. It must expose violations. We need to build coalitions that defend judicial independence. Venezuela’s crisis revealed how deeply international mechanisms can fail. At the height of its repression, Venezuela was part of the UN human rights council. How ironic is that? 


You’ve lived through the consequences of a politicized judiciary. What is your message to American judges, lawyers, and citizens who may believe “it can’t happen here”?

I once believed that it couldn’t happen in Venezuela either. But it did. It began with small acts of fear and silence. My message to Americans is this: democracy depends on courageous judges, attorneys, and informed citizens. Don’t wait for that collapse. Speak up when you see injustice. Defend the courts before they become politicized beyond repair. Don’t allow the destruction of the court’s reputation because that’s the beginning of the collapse. That’s why I joined the Speak Up for Justice initiative. We need to call this issue to the world’s attention. This is a wake up call for every single American. We need to defend our Constitution. People usually say that judges should not rule in a certain way because they are not politicians, but judges control the executive and legislative branches. Many of them are so courageous, like Judge Salas, and we have to support them. Her contribution is huge. She suffered an enormous loss. She continues to defend the judicial branch. We should honor her courageous character.

Given your experience in Venezuela, how does Speak Up for Justice provide a global platform for exiled judges and legal professionals to warn others and push for reform?

Speak up for Justice is more than a forum; I think it’s a movement. It gives exiled judges like me a voice. It reaches across borders, so we can share what went wrong and why. It provides an early warning system for democracies under threat. I encourage everyone to follow the movement. 
Contact your elected officials and learn how to get involved because the best time to act is before the collapse. That’s why I joined this movement. I’m a US citizen. I’m afraid that I may face consequences or retaliation because I’m choosing to speak up. But now is the time. I promised myself that if I to go to jail or face consequences, I will do it because it’s not about me. We have to speak up. We have to protect our judicial system. 
We have to protect our judges and we must do our part. Otherwise, we’re going to lose everything.

It’s been so traumatic. Thank you for this interview. I think we need to be involved in every aspect because we need to create a world that is welcoming to people. I need to speak out. I need to tell my story. I don’t want this to be just a testimony; I need to warn US citizens and the legal community. What happened in Venezuela can happen everywhere. I encourage everyone to follow and join the Speak Up for Justice movement. The next forum takes place on July 31, and we need your voice in this fight.