Reimel Ariosa, a prominent lawyer with the Gowper team operating in Spain and the United States, issued a stark warning during an interview with Tania Costa on CiberCuba. He emphasized that any political transition in Cuba lacking judicial accountability could potentially allow those responsible for decades of human rights abuses to escape unpunished.
When questioned about whether Cuba is currently experiencing a transition, Ariosa responded with caution yet determination. "I don't know if we're in transition. However, we must be vigilant against false transitions and negotiated ones that might lead to the regime's immunity," he asserted.
The lawyer stressed that the primary concern isn't the absence of political change but rather how such change might unfold. "One of my main worries is ensuring the regime isn't immune during a transition. Judicial proceedings need to be established with due guarantees to hold violators accountable for human rights breaches," Ariosa highlighted.
Drawing parallels with Spain, Ariosa underscored the significance of transitional justice. "Spain is witnessing this necessity. It's crucial for the society to heal its wounds to avoid repeating past mistakes," he stated. The Spanish experience is noteworthy as it took four decades for the country to implement formal justice mechanisms following Franco's regime, culminating in the 2007 Historical Memory Law.
The Legal Framework for Change
This warning is part of a broader legal debate where Ariosa joined fellow lawyer Julio Rodríguez Pellitero, who advocated for reinstating Cuba's 1940 Constitution as a legal foundation for any transition process.
Rodríguez Pellitero pointed out that this constitution explicitly prohibited confiscation. "Expropriation without fair compensation is confiscation, and that's banned. Article 24 of the constitution prohibits confiscation, allowing only expropriation in exchange for just compensation," he explained.
According to Rodríguez Pellitero, Fidel Castro violated this principle by nationalizing private properties without compensation from 1959 onwards. Should the 1940 Constitution be reinstated, "independent courts—not those of the regime—will have to determine that just compensation," he noted.
Washington's Role and Cuban Responsibility
Discussing the potential involvement of the United States in a change process, Ariosa acknowledged its limitations. "It would be great if the U.S. could lead this effort, but they're encountering significant obstacles in executing it," he remarked, emphasizing that the ultimate responsibility lies with the Cuban people. "It's up to us to rise against this tyranny and remove it from power," he concluded.
The widespread opposition to a transition without justice is evident among the populace. A survey conducted in April 2026 revealed that 57.9% of Cubans deem any change process unacceptable unless it includes judicial actions against regime figures, reinforcing the stance of the interviewed legal experts.
Frequently Asked Questions on Cuba's Political Transition
What is the main concern regarding Cuba's political transition?
The main concern is that the transition might occur without judicial accountability, allowing those responsible for human rights violations to remain unpunished.
Why is Spain mentioned as an example in the context of transitional justice?
Spain is cited as an example because it took four decades to implement formal justice mechanisms following Franco’s regime, highlighting the importance of addressing past injustices to prevent future ones.
What does the 1940 Cuban Constitution say about confiscation?
The 1940 Cuban Constitution explicitly prohibits confiscation, allowing only expropriation with fair compensation, which Castro violated by nationalizing properties without compensation.