Juan Soto Ivars published a few days ago, a resonant and courageous article of Zolescas reminiscences in ‘El Confidencial’, where he denounced an ignominious legal trapsand perpetrated by the so -called Constitutional Court. The case, really scandalous, shrinks the mood; We will not break down their vicissitudes, but … in short accounts covers the kidnapping of the children by a mother who had filed a complaint for “gender violence” against the father; He denounces that, before the so -called Constitutional Court failed to grant the woman, he had proven false (although the court that should have proceeded against the complainant had limited himself to dismiss her). The so -called Constitutional Court, however, pretends to ignore this crucial fact, granting probative value to a Rocambolesca complaint that, in this way, is truly irrefutable. «It is the same mechanism – writes Soto Ivars – that we see daily in the press, the ‘I believe you’, only disguised with togas and long legal retrievers»; or the imposition of feminist ideology on reality.
Towards the end of its Gallardo article, Soto Ivars launches a battery of accusations: «I accuse, first, the legislators who introduced the criminal disparity and fed it with new woods; and accuses the press that he has not investigated its consequences; and also accuse the judges who do not deduce testimony even when they are certain that a complaint is spurious and malicious; and accuse the Constitutional Court […]not to abolish the presumption of innocence of the male, but the innocence proven, with this amparo ». There are many accusations that could be summarized in one: under the regime of 78, the law has ceased to be the determination of justice, to become a positivist surgery born of the pure arbitration of power, which uses laws and judicial sentences to impose its will. In the case at hand, the discretion of power consists in imposing feminist ideology as an incoercible truth; and to impose it, all kinds of legal iniquities and aberrations are used. First, they are approved in the Parliament unanimously (it is important to highlight this fact) aberrant laws that allow us to raise penalties in cases where the male is the aggressor and the woman the victim, in flagrant violation of the principle of equality before the law; aberrant laws that also invest the burden of evidence, also violating the presumption of innocence. Next, the members and members of the Constitutional Court receive – in the words of Alfonso Guerra, who revealed to us this enormity a few years ago, after those members and members were going to cry tears of crocodile – “strong pressures” to establish the constitutionality of the aberrant law (that is, that they knew sabbage). Once an aberrant law becomes unattainable, terror between judges and prosecutors is sown, so that none can be grinding and applying a presumption of guilt to the male, while making a blind eye before the avalanche of false complaints that this aberrant and encourages aberrant law encourages. And, in case some hint of justice between such a tangle of wicked rinses will be sneaked, the so -called Constitutional Court emerges again, to ensure that the criminal behaviors of any woman are unpunished and that men, for the mere fact of being, are punished, although they have been proven that they are innocent.
This action of the so -called Constitutional Court is nothing but a stinking dressing – another – of the cake cooked in the ovens of the 78 regime, which has turned the right is a mere act of will of the power that can house within its most unfair ends; Among them, of course, giving satisfaction to the sordidly vindictive desire of feminist ideology. Under the 78 regime, political power has a demiurgic capacity to create laws that respond to the ideology prevailing at all times and arbitrarily determine what is fair. The State thus becomes a capricious creator of justice, a “Gorgona of power”, according to Kelsen’s famous expression, that – of course! – guarantees that the interpretation of law Through the so -called CGPJ, another political organ), well in a “spiritual” way, terrifying and threatening judges who cannot materially control with media ordalies, if they dare to challenge the reigning ideology.
The 78 regime, in short, enshrines the most monstrous form of totalitarianism, in which political power configures arbitrarily and without any relationship with an idea of justice (legal nihilism), to strangle the vital horizon of people under their domain, which imposes the destruction of the links and the dissolution of the institutions that defend them, naturally starting them by the family. (Existential nihilism). We must denounce this oprobious regime, which protects the conversion of law into a pure exercise of force at the service of the reigning ideology.
#Juan #Manuel #Prada #reported #regime
