Áñez released from prison – consequences for judges incarcerating her expected
Friday, November 7th 2025 – 12:08 UTC
Áñez admitted her health had deteriorated while in detention
Upon her release from the Miraflores prison on Thursday, Former Bolivian President Jeanine Áñez pointed out that the political monster had to be defeated for her to be freed after nearly five years, and the truth of the 2019 crisis recognized.
“The monster had to go so that I could return to life, the monster had to go so that it would be recognized that there was never a coup in this country,” Áñez stated. “What there was was electoral fraud that led all Bolivians to protest,” she further explained.
The TSJ’s Supreme Order 011/2025 determined that a “power vacuum” occurred in November 2019 following the resignation of then-President Evo Morales, legally supporting the view that no coup d’état was committed.
Despite her very hard and very painful time under unjust imprisonment, Áñez insisted she would never regret having stepped up to serve Bolivia during the 2019 crisis. That is the commitment that every Bolivian who loves their country must make, and I made it even though I knew that at some point it would come at a cost, she said, adding that she acted with great conviction and in good faith.
She also acknowledged that her health severely deteriorated during her detention, noting she now has many mental gaps, but affirmed she remains standing strong, serving Bolivia from wherever I am needed.
Her acquittal is poised to trigger legal action against the judges who convicted Áñez in the first place. Manuel Baptista, President of the Judicial Council, admitted the institution has not been formally notified of the TSJ’s ruling but stated that if requested, an audit would be conducted. Baptista warned that if judges were found to have acted without proper jurisdiction—a serious offense—the penalty is dismissal.
Concurring with this view, TSJ Chief Justice Rómer Saucedo confirmed that the Judicial Council would “initiate legal action to verify whether their conduct constituted serious and very serious offenses,” potentially leading to sanctions or the dismissal of the involved judges.
