Cristina Kirchner’s conviction exposes a political strategy to silence opposition voices and threatens the foundations of Argentina’s fragile democracy.
The recent Supreme Court decision confirming a six-year sentence and lifetime political ban against Cristina Fernández de Kirchner—former president and still the most influential figure in Argentine politics—has ignited not just outrage, but deep concern over the state of democracy and judicial independence in Argentina.
The ruling, celebrated by current President Javier Milei and his supporters, arrives suspiciously close to Kirchner’s announcement that she would run for office in Buenos Aires. Many observers, both in Argentina and abroad, are questioning whether this is a case of justice served, or rather a dangerous episode of political persecution masked as legal process.
A conviction without direct evidence
Despite the severity of the sentence, the case against Kirchner lacks material proof. No signed orders, no financial enrichment, no clear chain of criminal command. The court instead relied on the argument that, as head of state, she must have known and therefore must be responsible. This logic contradicts a core principle of criminal law: individual culpability must be proven beyond doubt.
The charges relate to alleged irregularities in public works during her presidency. Yet the same projects were approved by Congress—including by opposition lawmakers—and no evidence directly links her to fraud. What’s more, Kirchner herself requested a full audit of her administration’s public works, a proposal that the opposition blocked. If she was trying to hide wrongdoing, why demand transparency?
Milei’s government and the danger of authoritarian tactics
Javier Milei, a self-proclaimed libertarian, presents himself as a champion of democracy. But celebrating a judicial ban on his most prominent political rival sends a very different message. His reposts of “Justice” on social media following the ruling suggest not neutrality, but complicity.
It’s worth remembering that Cristina Kirchner survived an assassination attempt in 2022, and has been systematically targeted ever since. Now, with this sentence, her political voice is being silenced—not through elections, but through the courts.
This is lawfare in action: using the justice system to remove a political figure whose popularity remains threatening to the status quo. And it doesn’t just damage Kirchner—it damages Argentine democracy.
The real threat: silencing democracy through the courts
Cristina Kirchner’s support base remains strong. For millions, she represents social protection, sovereignty, and resistance to neoliberal austerity. Her return to the electoral stage would likely have shifted the political landscape—and that, it seems, is exactly what the ruling powers wanted to prevent.
But this political maneuver could backfire.
There are powerful precedents in Latin America: Juan Domingo Perón was banned from returning for nearly two decades, only to win the presidency again in 1973. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, unjustly jailed and barred from elections, later returned stronger and reclaimed the presidency in Brazil. The attempt to erase Cristina Kirchner from the political map could unintentionally amplify her legacy.
Moreover, legal experts agree that she still has the right to request a judicial review of her sentence. Given the lack of solid evidence and the irregularities during her trial, such a review could overturn the ruling in the near future.
This is not just about Cristina. It’s about whether political rivals should be defeated at the ballot box or eliminated by judicial fiat. If the answer is the latter, then Argentina is no longer just fighting inflation or recession—it’s fighting for the soul of its democracy.
