The complaint against the provisional judge, substitute public defender and member of the administrative staff of Unefa-Bolívar, Germain Gregorio Vizaes Osorio, will be elevateda to the corresponding instances.
Noel Gómez Herrera
A judicial decision is the one issued by a judge in order to solve a specific situation in dispute, with legal effects for the parties involved, but at no time to create greater confusion than that existing before starting the process, due to negligence or ignorance. of the judicial officer, which in legal technique is called error judicial inexcusableexpressly defined in article 49, numeral 8, of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and in the Code of Ethics of the Venezuelan Judge, whose article 9, numeral 21, classifies it as one of the grounds for dismissal.
“Any person may request from the State the restoration or repair of the legal situation damaged by judicial error, unjustified delay or omission. The right of the individual to demand the personal responsibility of the magistrate or the magistrate, the judge or the judge is preserved; and the right of the State to act against these or these”, the constitutional text clearly states in the aforementioned article 49, numeral 8.
In a judgment dated November 5, 2021, by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, in a presentation by magistrate Luis Fernando Damiani Bustillos, Venezuelan jurisprudence provides new elements to the issue of inexcusable judicial error by specifically referring to “judgments or orders suspiciously contradictory to each other.
In this sense, the Chamber established that, in order for it to be classified as inexcusable, the judicial error must be “gross, patent and indubitable, that there is no doubt whatsoever about the inaccuracy of the decision issued, and that it manifests an open, clear and unequivocal contradiction between the reality proven in the process and the conclusions that the judge obtains regarding said reality…”. In other words, the error must be very serious, that is, insurmountable.
As is well known, the judge is a magistrate invested with the power to decide legal controversies honestly and neatly and “if he knows something about law, much better”, as the distinguished Venezuelan jurist Elio Gómez Grillo (1924-2014) used to say. As of the year 2000, it corresponded to him to preside over the Commission for the Operation and Restructuring of the Venezuelan Judicial System, by decision of the Constituent Assembly of the year 1999, instance of which he was also a part.
The approach comes up on the occasion of the complaint made public by the engineer Manuel Antonio Guzmán Gómez, editor-founder of the newspaper The expresswho in his judicial fight to re-enter his home, located on the sixth floor of the Saleranda building, Vista Hermosa urbanization, Ciudad Bolívar, has come across a recent decision by provisional judge Germain Gregorio Vizaes Osorio, in charge of the second court of first instance in function of control, who through “notification slip” dated February 27, 2023, now denies him the legitimate right that assists him to re-enter the home he ownsillegally occupied for several years, being disturbed by flagrant possession to the detriment of their most elementary rights, enshrined in the National Constitution and in the laws of the Republic.
The aforementioned judicial document totally contradicts the decision of the same provisional judge Vizaes Osorio, dated May 15, 2022, contained in document number 2022-CM.185, by which he orders the reinstatement of engineer Guzmán Gómez to his home, “as agreed at the Imputation Hearing, through this court, on May 15, 2022, since the aforementioned citizen is the owner of the Ut Supra of the aforementioned apartment“.
In the same document, the judicial official orders the Scientific, Criminal and Criminal Investigation Corps (CICPC) to legally accompany the victim to his property, for the purpose of complying with the court order to re-enter the home you own.
Curiously, both documents of the aforementioned judge have totally different signatures, as can be seen in the photostats that accompany the complaint by engineer Guzmán Gómez, who appears in both court documents with identity card numbers that do not belong to him.
PROVISIONAL JUDGE, SUBSTITUTE DEFENDER AND LAWYER OF UNEFA-BOLÍVAR
Provisional judge Germain Gregorio Vizaes Osorio, is registered with the Lawyer’s Social Welfare Institute (IPSA) under number 262,696 and by Resolution dated August 23, 2022, published in the Official Gazette number 42,446, of that same date, he was also appointed as First Provisional Public Defenderwith competence in matters of Adolescent Criminal Responsibility, attached to the Regional Unit of Public Defense of Bolívar state, Puerto Ordaz Extension, as Coordinator of the aforementioned Extension, as a substitute. Additionally, Vizae Osorio appears as part of the permanent administrative staff of the National Experimental Polytechnic University of the Armed Forces, as stated in Agreement No. 0094 dated July 15, 2022, of the University Council of the aforementioned State institution, published in the University Gazette number 003, corresponding to the month of September year 2022. The administrative position of the aforementioned provisional judge and substitute public defender is that of Lawyer for Unefa, Núcleo Bolívar, in open violation of the article 20 of the Code of ethics of the Venezuelan judge and Venezuelan judgewhich reads textually: “The judges or judges will exercise their functions exclusive dedication, the judicial function is incompatible with the free practice of law or any other public or private function, paid or unpaid. Academic, accidental, assistance or teaching charges are excluded from this incompatibility, provided that these charges do not interfere with their judicial functions.
