Blow 1: Camacho demanded suspension of the trial while the TCP analyzes the case.

The judicial crisis surrounding the "Golpe 1" case has once again highlighted the growing polarization and the influence of political power over the judicial system in the country. The recent admission of the unconstitutionality action against the crime of terrorism filed by Camacho has sparked new tensions. Particularly with the decision of the Plurinational Constitutional Court (TCP) to review this appeal, which has raised doubts about the impartiality of justice in the country. Camacho's lawyer, Martín Camacho, has made it clear that he will request the suspension of the trial while the TCP analyzes his appeal. In a recent statement, he noted that the suspension of the process is essential to ensure that the constitutional court's ruling is taken into account. This considering that the crime of terrorism is the main criminal charge against his client. The lawyer's stance has exposed an underlying legal and political controversy. Because the judicialization of the 2019 political conflict seems to be part of a broader scenario of the masista regime's intervention over justice. This questioning of the judicial system arises because the TCP has already reviewed and overturned a previous decision by a lower court that had rejected the unconstitutionality action. The same IACHR has pointed out on several occasions that the treatment of figures like terrorism in the Bolivian legal system is questionable and must be adjusted to international standards. The political influence of MAS over the judicial system has been a constant since Evo Morales came to power. With the election of magistrates aligned with the government and the removal of opposition figures from the judicial system, the independence of justice has been seriously compromised. Camacho's case is just one of many examples that show how the masista regime uses the judicial apparatus to harass its political opponents and curb criticism. Lawyer Martín Camacho has assured that if the figure of terrorism is declared unconstitutional, the judicial process against him should fall. But defense lawyers fear that the judicial system will continue its course despite the admission of this appeal and that, despite the review in the TCP, justice will continue to be partial and biased. Will justice prevail? In recent weeks, Camacho's legal team has denounced the presentation of insufficient evidence by the Ministry of Government, which further questions the validity of the judicial process. The controversy over the evidence presented by the Ministry of Government is another critical point of the case. According to Camacho's lawyer, the ministry presented more than 200 pieces of evidence, many of which are photocopied documents and press clippings that lack legal support. Despite this, the court has decided to allow part of this evidence to continue being considered in the trial. What seems increasingly evident is that the government, through the judicial system, is seeking a guilty verdict against Camacho. This in order to weaken the resistance to its regime. The use of judicial processes as a mechanism of political persecution is a recurring tactic in leftist authoritarian governments. Through the judicialization of the 2019 crisis, the regime has managed to keep its detractors under constant pressure. The TCP's response to Camacho's unconstitutionality action could be key to determining whether the country continues to move toward a rule of law or if it is becoming a state where justice becomes a tool of political power. The "Golpe 1" case not only highlights the lack of impartiality of the Bolivian judicial system. It also reveals the use of justice as a political weapon to intimidate and criminalize the opposition. What is at stake is the defense of democratic principles and the right to a fair and impartial trial. Something that seems increasingly distant in the country's judicial scenario. In this context, the central question will be whether the Plurinational Constitutional Court will really have the courage to do justice and act independently. Otherwise, it will succumb to the political pressure of the masista government. The response will be decisive not only for the future of the trial against Camacho but for the credibility of the Bolivian judicial system as a whole.