![\"\"](\"https:\/\/armando.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/01112018-1.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\nThe \r\nnotice that Rojas Guzm\u00e1n is not a legal practitioner reached the ears of the \r\ndefense of the deputy through the personnel of the Palace of Justice. Therefore, \r\nthe first week of October, the Internal Policy Committee of the National \r\nAssembly asked the Lawyers' Social Security Institute (Inpreabogado) to clarify \r\nthe issue. The answer arrived three weeks later to the hands of lawyer Joel \r\nGarc\u00eda, counsel for the defense of Requesens and appointed by deputy Delsa \r\nSol\u00f3rzano, as a letter. \"(...) The abovementioned individual (Rojas Guzm\u00e1n) is \r\nnot registered, to date, as a lawyer of the Republic, to date, errors and \r\nomissions in the computer system excepted,\" reads the document endorsed by the \r\npresident of Inpreabogado, Luis Gonz\u00e1lez Blanco.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
\"The \r\nConstitution provides that every act or individual usurping a function is null \r\nand void and in any act that entails that consequence, the individual incurs \r\ncriminal liability under civil and administrative law. But not only the \r\nindividual who serves as clerk incurs that irregularity, also the judge, as it \r\nis the judge who appointed the clerk,\" said lawyer Garc\u00eda, before declaring that \r\nRequesens should not be deprived of his freedom for this and other \r\nirregularities.<\/p>\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/armando.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/01112018-2.jpg\")
<\/div><\/div><\/a><\/figure><\/div><\/div><\/li>![\"\"](\"https:\/\/armando.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/01112018-3.jpg\")
<\/div><\/div><\/a><\/figure><\/div><\/div><\/li><\/ul><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\nNo Signature, but History<\/h2>\n\n\n
Rojas \r\nGuzm\u00e1n has a long career in the Venezuelan judiciary. According to information \r\nfrom the Venezuelan Institute of Social Security (IVSS), since February 16, \r\n1997, the almost 44-year-old woman is an active employee of the Executive Office \r\nof the Magistracy, the subsidiary body of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ), \r\nthe purpose of which is \"to exercise, by delegation, the functions of running, \r\nmanagement, administration, inspection, and oversight of the \r\nJudiciary.\"<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
A \r\nlist of active members of the savings bank of the judiciary, of February of this \r\nyear, confirms that she is employed by said body. She previously served as an \r\nassistant in other trials but, according to the defense, she never served as a \r\nclerk.<\/p>\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/armando.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/01112018-4.jpg\")
<\/div><\/div><\/a><\/figure><\/div><\/div><\/li>![\"\"](\"https:\/\/armando.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/01112018-5.jpg\")
<\/div><\/div><\/a><\/figure><\/div><\/div><\/li><\/ul><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\nIn \r\nsocial media, Rojas Guzm\u00e1n described herself as \"a prosperous and chosen \r\ndaughter of God,\" \"mother of two wonderful children,\" \"100% Venezuelan,\" \"a \r\ndetermined fighter\" and \"a winner.\" At least until 2013, she was not an active \r\nmember of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) or the Fifth Republic \r\nMovement (MVR). And, although she does not express her political preferences, at \r\nleast publicly, as most Venezuelans, she criticizes the so-called \"Maduro diet\". \r\nSome of her close relatives are openly opponents in the social \r\nmedia.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
However, \r\nthe presence of Rojas Guzm\u00e1n in this court is suspicious for the defense and \r\nothers, who connect her with high officials of the Venezuelan \r\nGovernment.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
\"That \r\nperson has not wanted to sign the acts that the court has developed. They want \r\nto put a person who is a lawyer instead, but we all know and the defense of the \r\nother defendants knows that the person who is actually there is not a lawyer,\" \r\nsaid Garc\u00eda.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
After \r\nbeing out of the country for a while, Judge Carol Padilla, head of the First \r\nSpecial Court of First Instance acting as Court of Proceedings, returned to the \r\ncourt, as the defense of Requesens stated on Monday. Regarding Padilla ?who, \r\naccording to Poderopedia, in 2013, was part of the team of the Office of the \r\nPresidency of the National Assembly (AN)?, Borges says that she is the right \r\nhand of the president of the National Constituent Assembly (ANC), Diosdado \r\nCabello.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
On \r\nthe day of the hearing of Requesens, a man from outside the court attended an \r\nact that was supposed to be private. The defense learned later that the man was \r\nPadilla\u2019s husband.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n
Flagrant Irregularities<\/h2>\n\n\n
On \r\nAugust 7, 2018, at 8:22 pm, Deputy Requesens was getting out of the elevator of \r\nhis building in the Terrazas de Club H\u00edpico neighborhood, southeast of Caracas, \r\nwith his sister Rafaela, president of the Federation of University Centers of \r\nUniversidad Central de Venezuela (UCV). Rumors that the SEBIN was looking for \r\nhim were louder at night, while Maduro spoke on a joint radio and television \r\nbroadcast.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
Witnesses \r\nsay that about a dozen officials approached the Requesens Martinez siblings \r\nbefore they left the building. Some were wearing hoods, other not. Several were \r\nspotted by the security camera of the building. Only five officials sign the \r\ndeputy's arrest warrant, even though all the participants in the operation were \r\nto sign it.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
The \r\ndefense of the deputy asked the Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office proofs of technical \r\ncoherence to determine if the video circulating on social media had been edited, \r\nin addition to anthropometric proofs to identify the participating officials and \r\nverify if their names agree with the few who signed the act. However, that was \r\ndenied.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/armando.info\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/01112018-6.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\nOn \r\nAugust 8, at 11:50 am, the president of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ), \r\nMaikel Moreno, informed through his Twitter account that the TSJ had decreed the \r\narrest of Requesens as \"flagrant,\" and ordered to hold the deputy under the \r\ncustody of the State security forces until the ruling Constituent Assembly \r\nresolved on the removal of the deputy's parliamentary immunity. This happened in \r\na matter of hours.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
\"The \r\nflagrancy is concomitant with the fact, not after,\" explains lawyer Joel Garc\u00eda, \r\nwho has insisted that in the case of Deputy Requesens, for the eight crimes \r\ncharged against him (continued public incitement, aggravated attempted homicide \r\nagainst President Maduro and against the military of the Bolivarian National \r\nGuard, use of explosive devices, criminal association, terrorist financing, \r\nproperty damage, and treason) one cannot speak of flagrante delicto. The failed \r\nattack occurred on August 4 and his arrest came three days \r\nlater.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
Yet, \r\neven if the official version on flagrancy were true, the team of Requesens\u2019 \r\nlawyers said that another irregularity would be committed. Article 200 of the \r\nConstitution provides that if a member of the parliament commits a flagrant \r\ncrime, the competent authority must hold him or her in custody in his\/her home. \r\nBut Requesens was transferred that night from his home to the Sebin headquarters \r\nin El Helicoide, where he has been for 86 days. However, he was missing for the \r\nfirst four hours.<\/p>\n\n\r\n\n
<\/p>\n\n