The Plenary approves by majority to also request the Lower House to obtain the report of the Council on the legislative initiative to renew the Constitutional
The Plenary of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), formed by the 19 members plus President Carlos Lesmes, has supported this Monday by a majority to demand that Congress seek the opinion of the governing body of the judges on the reform promoted by the PSOE to unblock the renewal of the Constitutional Court (TC) and, in turn, to refer the legislative initiative to the Venice Commission (consultative body of the Council of Europe) so that it can rule on its legality.
By ten votes against seven (two other members voted blank), the majority of councilors from the conservative sector have achieved their objective of moving forward with their proposal so that the CGPJ has a leading role in the counter-reform proposed by the Socialist Parliamentary Group. This is a modification of the Organic Law to return to the Council the power to make the judicial appointments of the two magistrates that fall under the Constitutional Court (the other two correspond to the Government until completing the change of one third of the members of the court of guarantee).
Today, the governing body of the judges is vetoed by law this ability to carry out judicial and governmental-judicial appointments while in office. A reform of March 2021 that was promoted precisely by the two parliamentary groups -PSOE and United We Can- that are part of the Executive.
The agreement of the CGPJ has been adopted with the vote in favor of the president of the Supreme Court and of the Council, Carlos Lesmes, and the members José Antonio Ballestero, Ángeles Carmona, Nuria Díaz, Juan Manuel Fernández, Carmen Llombart, José María Macías, Juan Martínez Moya, Gerardo Martínez Tristán and Wenceslao Olea.
The members Roser Bach, Mar Cabrejas, Álvaro Cuesta, Clara Martínez de Careaga, Rafael Mozo, Concepción Sáez and Pilar Sepúlveda have voted against. While the members Enrique Lucas and Vicente Guilarte have voted blank.
“Contradictory and inconsistent”
The text of the agreement considers that the bill tries to avoid the “difficulties” that the renewal of the constitutional bodies entails. A justification that is “contradictory and incoherent”, since the Constitutional is as much a constitutional body as are the courts and tribunals, served by judges and magistrates who are members of the Judicial Power whose superior, in all orders, is the Supreme.
The agreement adds that the “serious damage” that is being generated for the proper functioning of the Administration of Justice has been repeatedly highlighted by the CGPJ, particularly in relation to the Supreme Court, whose Government Chamber adopted an Agreement last day June 27, 2022 in which his current situation is denounced.
The text recalls that the Government has the obligation to submit its preliminary projects to the report of the Plenary of this CGPJ, while for the bills presented in the General Courts by the parliamentary groups, the request for that report is not mandatory. However, the principle of “consistent interpretation” with European Union Law resulting from the CJEU’s jurisprudence imposes that, when the bill refers to the nuclear aspects of the statute of the members of the Judiciary “it must be processed listening to all the sectors involved, which includes the CGPJ itself».
Compliance with the European standards outlined in these recommendations and other previous texts of the Council of Europe means that the CGPJ can report on the legislative initiative referred to in this agreement, and that the other institutions and sectors involved can also do so, notably, and in accordance with the recommendations of the European Commission and the Council of Europe, the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission).
#CGPJ #urges #Congress #bring #socialist #reform #Europe