The national ombudsman, Verónica Encina, is well aware that she often finds herself swimming against the tide in many debates. While various actors within the justice system advocate for stricter penalties, she, from the Public Defender's Office (DPP), strives to ensure that the discussion also includes considerations that uphold due process.
The national ombudsman asserts that increasing penalties and strengthening the fight against crime are valid approaches, but she also emphasizes that there are more options for advancing security. For now, she stresses that adjustments must be made to the "No Escape" bill, a government initiative that seeks to amend the Criminal Procedure Code to allow for trials to be held in the absence of the accused.
Therefore, the challenges she has set for herself for the year 2026 are to advance the reform that grants autonomy to the DPP and to promote a law that modernizes and strengthens the institution.
She has been in office for one year. How has it been to face this challenge?
It has been an incredibly intense year, full of challenges, but the most important thing is that we have achieved strengthening the Public Defender's Office in all aspects, except for the budgetary aspect, which is currently at risk. The first major achievement was the presentation of the constitutional reform project that establishes the autonomy of this institution, which has been an aspiration from the beginning. In addition, we have just inaugurated our academy, which is also a significant milestone. And, on the other hand, it has been…
AI Brief
Your highlights
National Defender Verónica Encina emphasizes that in many debates, she often finds herself advocating against the prevailing views. While various actors within the justice system aim to increase penalties, she, from the Public Defender's Office (DPP), strives to ensure that the debate also incorporates considerations that uphold due process. Encina asserts that increasing penalties and strengthening the fight against crime are valid approaches, but she also highlights that there are other avenues to improve security. She stresses the need to introduce adjustments to the "No Escape" bill, a government initiative seeking to amend the Criminal Procedure Code to allow trials in absentia. Her priorities for 2026 include advancing the reform that grants autonomy to the DPP and promoting a law that modernizes and strengthens the institution. She recently completed her first year in office.
**Interviewer:** How has it been facing this challenge?
**Encina:** It has been an incredibly intense year, full of challenges, but the most important achievement is the strengthening of the Defensoría in all aspects, except for the budgetary aspect, which is currently at risk. The first major achievement was the approval of the bill that grants autonomy to the Public Defender's Office.
**Interviewer:** You mentioned budgetary concerns.
**Encina:** Yes, we need to ensure that we are not cut back, and that we receive the resources necessary to hire more defenders.
**Interviewer:** What are your thoughts on the current functioning of the criminal justice system?
**Encina:** The accusatory system, when implemented, promised efficiency and speed. However, prolonged hearings and delays in setting dates are ongoing problems that affect both the efficiency of prosecution and the rights of the accused. It is unacceptable for a trial to last four years. Furthermore, there is a concerning increase in the number of people deprived of their liberty, which was supposed to be addressed by the accusatory model. The increase in pre-trial detention is often celebrated as a solution for public safety, but it does not generate that result. In fact, it can hinder social reintegration and crime prevention.
**Interviewer:** What do you think about the proposals to increase penalties?
**Encina:** There is a global trend towards a sort of penal populism, where increasing penalties is seen as a solution without evidence that it reduces crime or improves security. There are other approaches, such as social policies, education, prevention, and alternative sentencing. However, these are often overlooked because it is mistakenly believed that the public will not support them.
**Interviewer:** What is the role of the Public Defender's Office in this context?
**Encina:** We, the Public Defender's Office, need to advocate for these alternative approaches. However, we often lack the support needed to stand up for the rights of defendants.
**Interviewer:** What are your thoughts on the "No Escape" bill, which allows for trials in absentia?
**Encina:** The right to be present at one's trial is a fundamental right. It is the only way for a person to exercise their right to defense. A defender cannot invent a defense theory or defend someone who is not present. This bill should be limited and exceptional.
**Interviewer:** You mentioned that the Public Prosecutor's Office is strengthening while the Public Defender's Office is not. How do you feel about the creation of the Supraterritorial Prosecutor's Office?
**Encina:** The Supraterritorial Prosecutor's Office is now functioning, but it has not yet had a significant impact on our work. We hope that there will be a balance achieved in the future. However, it is a challenge, and we need to ensure that we are not further weakened.
**Interviewer:** Do you believe that the Public Defender's Office can achieve autonomy and a law that strengthens its position?
**Encina:** We need to increase the number of local defenders, and we need a legal modification to allow us to do so. We have discussed this with the authorities, and we are making progress.