Juana Rivas' Legal Team Seeks Recusal of Judges Amid Controversial Manifesto
The legal team representing Juana Rivas has formally requested the recusal of Aurora Angulo, the head of the Domestic Violence Court 2 of Granada. This request comes in response to Angulo's involvement in a manifesto signed by over a hundred judges across Spain, which criticized Rivas’ legal representation and their criticisms of the judiciary's actions in her case. Attorney Carlos Aránguez, who leads Rivas' legal team, has stated that the request aims to ensure an impartial judicial process and argues that Angulo’s participation in the manifesto showcases a bias against Rivas.
The recusal request was filed after over a hundred judges from specialized gender violence courts publicly defended Angulo against what they perceive as unwarranted attacks from Rivas’ legal counsel. This support solidifies Angulo's position, which Rivas’ team claims compromises her ability to conduct a fair evaluation of any case related to their client.
Notably, Rivas’ legal team has also targeted Judge Cristina Cueto for recusal, due to her similar support of Angulo by signing the same manifesto. Cueto has been involved in crucial stages of Rivas' legal journey since 2016, and her alleged loss of impartiality further intensifies the legal team's concerns. The Rivas team asserts that both judges have put their neutrality at risk, and thus, should be replaced for the continuation of any related proceedings.
This situation unfolds amidst the complicated backdrop of Rivas' ongoing legal saga, which originated from her initial complaints back in 2016. According to Aránguez, Judge Angulo's decisions have had 'disastrous consequences' for Rivas and her children since she took over the case in 2017.
As the legal battle progresses, the notion of judicial impartiality comes to the forefront, highlighting the struggles individuals face within the justice system, especially in sensitive cases concerning domestic violence. The development of Rivas’ case continues to spark significant debate among legal professionals and advocates alike, indicating the profound complexities and repercussions that can arise from judicial actions.
Related Sources: