The plenary of the CGPJ rejects by 9 votes to 8 to issue a report on the consequences of the repeal of sedition that the Government intends and unanimously supports its critical opinion on the animal welfare law
The General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) is holding an ordinary plenary session today with two outstanding issues on the table: the request of a group of conservative members to decide whether the Council should give its opinion on the PSOE and United We Can proposal to repeal the crime of sedition, although it has not been requested from the Cortes. Secondly, to deal with the appointment of the two candidates to the Constitutional Court that is the responsibility of the body within the process of renewal of the court of guarantees, which has been breaking the law since mid-September.
It was on November 18 when eight members -Gerardo Martínez, José Antonio Ballestero, Juan Manuel Fernández, Juan Martínez Moya, José María Macías, Nuria Díaz Abad, Carmen Llombart and Ángeles Carmona- asked the interim president of the CGPJ, Rafael Mozo, to include on the agenda its proposal on the penal reform announced by the Government (it means repealing sedition as a crime against public order and introducing aggravated public disorder with less penalty).
These members want, firstly, “the Plenary to rule on the lack of request for a report” in relation to the proposal to repeal sedition and, in a further step, “to debate whether, despite this, it does not It would be opportune for the Plenary to evacuate said report ».
The point is that PSOE and Unidas Podemos presented their legislative initiative as a bill, a formula that allows not requesting reports from the CGPJ and other constitutional bodies that, if the bill had been adopted, would be mandatory. “We must bear in mind that European standards require that all regulatory proposals that affect the Judiciary must be submitted to a prior report from the Justice Councils,” argue these eight members.
In addition, they draw attention to the fact that “on repeated occasions we find ourselves with important reforms that affect the Judiciary and that, instead of being processed as bills by the Government, it is the parliamentary groups that support the Government that present in Congress as bills, thus obviating the processing of the mandatory report of this Council if it had been processed in another way”.
No progress in the TC
Also on the agenda is the proposal for the appointment of the two Constitutional magistrates that is the responsibility of the CGPJ. Since the body regained its competence to name the duo for the court of guarantees last July, after a counter-reform promoted by the PSOE, the progressive and conservative blocks negotiate the two names. However, the last meeting, held this Wednesday, has concluded again without progress.
The aforementioned sources explain that the progressive sector has insisted on appointing Supreme Court magistrate José Manuel Bandrés as its candidate, while the conservative wing continues without uncovering its potential candidates.
At the moment, the stumbling block seems to be that the conservatives want to jointly negotiate the two names, without it being a mere sum of the candidates proposed by each bloc. The negotiating committee will meet again on the 30th, which means extending the talks for another week. This despite the fact that the Government, in the mouth of Minister Félix Bolaños, insisted yesterday on the need to get out of the blockade and comply with the law and the Constitution.
#Judiciary #agrees #vote #candidates #Constitutional #Court #December