On November 3, 2023, an appeal was filed with the Supreme People's Court, after the Habeas Corpus request in favor of Adrián Curuneaux Stevens, vice president of the Movement of Opponents for a New Republic (MONR), was rejected on November 1, 2023.
The political activist has been imprisoned since August 3, 2023, at the Valle Grande penitentiary in Havana, after being accused of allegedly assaulting a police officer.
The appeal alerted the Supreme Court to the length of time Adrián Curuneaux has been detained without the guarantees and formalities stipulated by law being observed. Among these issues is the exceeding of the legal time limit for carrying out the investigative actions, which, according to criminal procedure regulations, must be completed as quickly as possible. Regarding the established time limits, Law 143/2021, "On Criminal Procedure," states that:
Article 173.2: “The period for the investigation of the preliminary phase file must not exceed ninety days from the date of the initial resolution and may only be extended by the prosecutor, justifiably, at the reasoned request of the head of the corresponding criminal investigation; in these cases, the maximum period for the completion of the file is one hundred and eighty days, counted from the date of the initial resolution, at which time the criminal investigator is obliged to deliver it to the prosecutor in the conditions in which it is found.”.
Regarding this request, the Court chose not to issue a ruling in its response and, in an unfortunate assessment, concluded that the Habeas Corpus appeal should only be admitted when the illegality of a detention derives from “the decision lacks the authorization of a person empowered to impose such a condition, or when there are not sufficient grounds to assume that he or she will be responsible for the criminal conduct being investigated“.
This interpretation by the Court violates fundamental rights and essential principles of due process, such as the presumption of innocence. By justifying the legality of Adrián Curuneaux's detention based on the presumption of his guilt, the Court overlooks the fact that this universal right implies treating the accused as innocent. This treatment must be maintained throughout the entire criminal process until a final judgment is issued. Furthermore, the burden of proof rests with the prosecution; that is, the responsibility to prove the facts on which its accusation is based. Instead of presuming guilt, the judge must proceed at all times from the premise of the accused's innocence.
On the other hand, by concluding that the detention is legal because it was authorized by a person empowered, the Court contradicts the United Nations principles against all forms of arbitrary detention.
International standards urge protection against arbitrary deprivation of liberty in all its forms, encompassing detention before, during, or after trial, as well as detention without any trial (administrative detention). In this context, the Court fails to fulfill its responsibility to effectively monitor deprivation of liberty at all stages of the proceedings.
Furthermore, the United Nations emphasizes that arbitrariness in detention occurs not only when applicable laws and procedures are violated, but also when the deprivation of liberty is disproportionate, unreasonable, and unnecessary. In this regard, the case of Adrián Curuneaux clearly constitutes arbitrary detention. The response of the Supreme People's Court confirms, once again, the vulnerability of this individual deprived of his liberty and of the citizenry in general with respect to their fundamental rights.