MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MLB MLB MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL MBL

The interim president of the judiciary believes that reducing majorities to break the blockade would be typical of a 'dictatorship'.

The acting president of the General Council for the Judiciary (CGPJ), Vicente Guilarte, was very critical of the reduction of the majorities to elect the members of the body defended by Sumar and Podemos as a way to force the renewal of the body, which has been pending for more than five years due to the blockade imposed by the Popular Party. 'We would be under the laws of a dictatorship. It is something that cannot even be brought up,” Guilarte said in a speech at the Justice Forum organized by the Madrid Bar Association. Furthermore, he added that the PSOE “cannot take seriously” this proposal, which in his opinion “destroys the separation of powers.”

The coalition partners demand from the Socialists, among other things, an urgent reform of the law on the judiciary, which unblocks the judiciary by reducing the required majorities. The current system of electing members means that the twenty members of the Council – twelve judges and magistrates and eight lawyers – are elected equally by Congress and the Senate. In both cases, a three-fifths majority is required, which traditionally required an agreement between PP and PSOE.

The change in the electoral system would mean that instead of the three-fifths, some of the members would be elected by absolute majority, as currently represented by the government and its partners, and would allow the PP blockade to be avoided . This system implies a change in the law of the judiciary that would affect the twelve judges and magistrates, as the election of the eight lawyers with a three-fifths majority is protected in the Constitution.

Given this option, Guilarte has again defended his proposal to limit the body's powers as a way to facilitate its renewal. Your option is “goal” agreements whereby the election of positions in the judicial leadership is left in the hands of the judges themselves and of a court of lawyers. In the current system, these appointments are made by members pre-elected by the parties.

As for the Supreme Court judges – who can remain in office until retirement – ​​their proposal is that they be appointed by a “qualified committee”, composed mainly of members and judges of the Supreme Court. And with regard to the so-called government positions – that is to say, the presidencies of the provincial courts, the regional courts and their chambers – his proposal entails that they be elected by the members of the judicial career of the relevant area.

“Just as important as renewing the Council is to find a formula that prevents us from ending up in a situation of apparent politicization of the body and the appointments it makes in the future,” said Guilarte, who recalled that 122 appointments are pending due to the It is impossible for the current CGPJ, when in office, to make discretionary appointments.

Guilarte said as much in his speech has once again rejected the dismissal of the members en bloc and has insisted he will leave office this summer. “My idea remains the same: make room for other people (…). I want to leave before summer comes. I want to leave in August, calm down,” he declared after admitting that he did not play a “relevant role” in resolving the blockage of the body, as was his wish.

Source link

Leave a Comment