The Constitutional Court (TC) has ruled that the public use of nicknames or sobriquets in criminal investigations violates the presumption of innocence and undermines judicial impartiality, as it risks prejudicing public and judicial perceptions of guilt before the actual sentencing. The decision, issued in ruling TC/0225/25, mandates that investigative bodies cease using such terms in courts, public media, and official communications.
The court specifically ordered the Specialized Prosecution Office for the Prosecution of Administrative Corruption (PEPCA) and the Office of the Public Prosecutor (PGR) to stop employing the nickname “Operation Medusa” or “Case Medusa” in reference to ongoing legal proceedings. The term, linked to a high-profile corruption investigation, was deemed to compromise the rights of those accused, including the right to honor, dignity, and privacy.
Then Operation Medusa applies to the charges made to former Attorney General Jean Alain Rodriguez Sanchez. Nevertheless, the PGR under former Attorney General Miriam German Brito applied sobriquets, such as Anti-Pulpo and Falcon, to notorious cases of administrative corruption and drug trafficking. Othe
“Assigning a nickname to an alleged criminal operation, without adhering to the confidentiality principles outlined, undermines sound investigative practices and reveals sensitive details of ongoing probes,” the TC stated in its ruling. It emphasized that such terms should only be used internally by investigative teams to organize work and prevent leaks, not for public dissemination.
The court clarified that public use of nicknames risks creating a narrative of guilt before a verdict is reached, which violates the principle of an impartial judiciary. “The use of such terms leads judges and the public to assume culpability without prior trial or judicial validation,” the ruling noted. It further warned that this practice could erode trust in the legal system by conflating investigative work with public judgment.
The decision extends to all cases where public nicknames might be used, applying to “situations factually and legally similar” to the Medusa case. The TC cited the need to protect fundamental rights, including the presumption of innocence, the right to personal image, and the dignity of individuals under investigation.
Read more in Spanish:
Listin Diario
Diario Libre
Diario Libre
1 May 2025