The Special Mission of the Organization of American States for the Strengthening of Democratic Institutions in Guatemala takes note of the ruling issued by the Constitutional Court in Case No. 1926-2026, granting a "preliminary injunction" ordering the return of the shortlist of candidates submitted for the election of the Attorney General and Head of the Public Prosecutor's Office, as well as the review of the qualifications of those candidates who had previously served as judges.
The Mission reaffirms once again the importance of respect for the Guatemalan constitutional order, the independence of institutions, and the binding nature of decisions issued by competent judicial bodies. Compliance with judicial decisions constitutes an essential element of the rule of law.
The Mission notes with concern that a "preliminary" decision, issued by a court that has declared itself incompetent, at an advanced stage of the nomination process, has substantive and, in practice, definitive effects on a list of candidates that has already been finalized and submitted for the exercise of the exclusive constitutional authority of the President of the Republic. In processes of this democratic significance, legal certainty and security, the predictability of rules, institutional stability, and public trust are indispensable.
The Mission has previously noted that the acts of the Nominating Committees may be subject to the challenge mechanisms provided for in the Guatemalan legal system. However, the possibility of judicial review should not result in permanent uncertainty or in the expansive alteration of preclusive stages that have already been completed, especially when it comes to processes subject to strict constitutional deadlines and linked to the renewal of authorities fundamental to the justice system.
The Mission notes that the resolution limits its mandate to reviewing the calculation of professional experience for applicants who have served as judges, in accordance with the constitutional interpretation established by the Court. This interpretation must be analyzed in light of the purpose and intent of the legal framework, as well as the international legal principles and obligations of non-discrimination, due process, and effective judicial protection. Consequently, and without prejudice to the binding nature of the decision, the Mission considers it essential that its implementation be strictly appropriate, limited, reasonable, proportional, and non-expansive. A "provisional" measure adopted at such an advanced stage of the proceedings must not, in its implementation, result in a general and indefinite reopening of the proceedings, nor in a substantive alteration of the shortlist, beyond what is strictly necessary to comply with the judicial order.
The Mission recalls that it has emphasized the importance of evaluating legal careers using objective, reasonable, public, and verifiable criteria, avoiding overly restrictive interpretations that could undermine the principles of merit, competence, suitability, integrity, equal treatment, and legitimate expectations of the applicants. The judicial function constitutes a legal career of particular institutional significance, and any decision regarding its evaluation must be applied with the utmost clarity, consistency, and proportionality.
The Mission further observes that the ruling establishes extraordinarily short deadlines for the return of the shortlist, the reclassification of files, the continuation of the corresponding stages, and the submission of a new shortlist to the President of the Republic. Therefore, it calls on all institutional actors to act with prudence, democratic responsibility, and strict adherence to the constitutional framework, ensuring that the implementation of the "provisional" measure does not result in violations of the legal order or a further erosion of public trust in the process.
The Mission urges the Nominating Committee to act promptly, transparently, in a traceable and individualized manner, preserving to the greatest extent possible the integrity of the work already carried out and the stability of the process. Any reclassification must be duly justified, documented, and limited to the effects strictly arising from the decision.
The Mission emphasizes that the Public Prosecutor's Office fulfills a constitutional role that is essential to democracy and the rule of law in Guatemala: access to justice, criminal prosecution, the fight against crime, the protection of victims, the fight against impunity, and the enforcement of human rights. Therefore, the selection of its highest authority must be concluded in a timely manner, based on a shortlist compiled according to criteria of merit, independence, integrity, competence, and suitability.
The Mission respectfully calls for the current situation to be resolved with the utmost seriousness, speed, transparency, and institutional stability, so that the President of the Republic may duly exercise, within the corresponding constitutional timeframe, the constitutional authority that falls exclusively within his purview.
The Mission will continue to monitor the process and reiterates its willingness to support efforts aimed at strengthening the rule of law, democratic institutions, and public trust in Guatemala.
Reference: E-050/26
