House committee questions nominees as panel that probes public officials faces credibility concerns

The Puerto Rico House Government Commission held a public hearing on May 12, 2025, to evaluate three judicial nominees sent by Gov. Jennifer González Colón to serve on the Panel on the Independent Special Prosecutor (Panel sobre Fiscal Especial Independiente, FEI). The nominees — Licenciada Leila Rolón Enrique, Licenciada Nélida Jiménez Velázquez and Licenciada Olga Virriel Cardona — described long careers in the judiciary and legal practice and pledged to evaluate future referrals “conforme a la prueba.”

The hearing focused less on the biographies of the nominees than on questions about the FEI’s independence, transparency and record. Several legislators cited internal statistics showing a low rate of findings after investigation: “de las denuncias presentadas del 2022-2024 fueron radicadas 119. Solamente 27 se encontraron causa,” leaving roughly 22.7% that found cause and a large share that led to no cause or were dismissed. Representative Héctor Ferrer Santiago and other lawmakers said that gap has damaged public confidence. Ferrer and others urged the nominees to help restore credibility to the FEI and to support possible legislative reforms.

Why it matters: the FEI is the mechanism used to investigate alleged crimes by public officials and high-ranking personnel. Lawmakers and nominees agreed that public trust in investigations affects the enforcement of public‑integrity laws and the perception of equal treatment under the law.

Most important claims and candidates’ statements

- Licenciada Leila Rolón Enrique, who described 21 years admitted to practice and 12 years as a superior court judge, said she would decide cases “conforme a la prueba.” She told the commission: “mi trayectoria se ha distinguido por asumir posturas cuando he tenido que asumirlas y hacer lo correcto…no me va a temblar la mano” in carrying out duties once confirmed.

- Licenciada Nélida Jiménez Velázquez, a retired appellate judge, said the FEI’s work often is reviewed only by the public through media summaries rather than the full record and pledged to examine evidence in depth: “me va a tocar evaluar la prueba y resolver sobre la prueba, como lo he hecho hasta ahora.”

- Licenciada Olga Virriel Cardona, nominated as an alternate member, said she intends to continue exercising caution about conflicts of interest while noting she remains active in private practice and that the FEI’s statutory compensation is limited: “el FEI pagó una dieta de 200 dólares el día que yo ejerza esa función,” and she described steps she has taken to avoid conflicts (requesting case recusals or relief where appropriate).

Lawmakers’ main concerns

Lawmakers repeatedly raised three themes: (1) the FEI’s low proportion of cases that led to a finding of cause; (2) institutional capacity and staffing (several speakers noted the FEI has operated with few members for long periods); and (3) transparency about why cases end without charges or why they end in plea agreements.

Representative Denis Márquez Lebrón and others argued the law that creates the FEI and the office’s jurisdiction deserve review and, in some cases, legislative amendments to improve efficiency and public trust. Representative Luis Pérez Ortiz noted the FEI has functioned in recent years with only two appointed members, sometimes with expired terms, and that a full complement of members could change the office’s operations.

Statutory limits and conflicts of interest

Members and legislators discussed statutory restrictions in Ley Núm. 2 de 1988 (as amended) and the panel’s conflict-of-interest rules. Denis Márquez referenced provisions limiting a panel member’s outside activities and noted Article 10 (as discussed in the hearing) that restricts intervention in matters that could pose apparent conflicts. Olga Virriel described how she has sought to avoid direct litigation conflicts by requesting relief or by declining representation in matters that could raise issues with FEI jurisdiction.

Procedural and transparency proposals

Multiple legislators urged greater public reporting after investigations conclude. One bill concept discussed in testimony would require a post-investigation report explaining why an investigation led (or did not lead) to charges, the evidence reviewed and the disposition. Several nominees expressed support for transparency “dependiendo de que no se revele información confidencial del expediente,” while reiterating the primary obligation to decide based on evidence.

Next steps

Committee chair Víctor Parés Otero (presiding for the Government Commission) said the committee will prepare the required committee report this week for the full chamber’s consideration. The hearing record shows broad legislative willingness to confirm the nominees, but lawmakers said confirming the slate should be accompanied by attention to operational reforms to restore public confidence.

The hearing record does not include a committee vote on the nominations; the commission said it would draft and issue a report to the House later in the week.