The governing chambers of the Supreme Court, the National Court and the 17 Superior Courts of Justice will hold elections next November to renew their composition, and the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) is studying the possibility of introducing voting in these internal elections. telematic to facilitate participation. The measure, however, is rejected by the governing chambers of the main courts, controlled by the majority Professional Association of the Judiciary (APM), with a conservative tendency. This Monday, three associations of judges—Francisco de Vitoria, Judges and Judges for Democracy and the Independent Judicial Forum—have shown their “concern” about the possibility that telematic voting will not prosper. “It would improve transparency,” they emphasize in a letter sent to the plenary session of the CGPJ and to which EL PAÍS has had access.
The open struggle over the regulation of telematic voting hides a power struggle in the judicial leadership. In the letter, which has 14 points, the three judicial groups explain that, until now, the elections to the government chambers have always been carried out by mail, but that “on many occasions” the documentation to vote by mail does not arrive on time to the judicial headquarters. “With the consequent damage to the right to vote,” they write.
“Telematic voting is a demand of the race and would improve the transparency of the electoral process,” they add. “In fact, telematic voting gives greater guarantees than the analogue medium. The method of the colleague moving with the envelopes of votes from other colleagues does not guarantee that the vote is anonymous and secret at the time of preparation of the envelope, nor at the time of its transport and deposit in the ballot box. On the other hand, telematic voting does ensure anonymity and with this method the voter can verify that the vote has been received without modification by the electoral board.” For this reason, the associations conclude: “We want to convey our concern that an initiative favorable to the interests of the judicial career, such as the possibility of telematic voting in elections to government chambers, may not be completed.”
The government chambers are collegiate bodies that make the main organizational and administrative decisions of the courts: among them, activating the necessary procedures so that judges can aspire to the most relevant appointments, proposing inspections or writing reports based on those decides the creation of new bodies. The number of judges that make up each chamber varies depending on the court, but all are composed of ex officio members (including the president and chamber presidents) and an equal number of magistrates or judges elected by their colleagues after an electoral process that It is held every five years and to which independent candidacies or proposals by judicial associations can be submitted.
The Organic Law of the Judiciary (LOPJ) provides for the election to be carried out by in-person or postal voting, but, as many judges complain, the former is almost impossible to exercise for many members of the race because voting can only be done at the headquarters of the corresponding Superior Court and, in some cases, at electoral section tables in another provincial capital. Many opt for voting by mail, but the judges assure that it also has “deficiencies”, such as the delay in receiving documentation.
What affects the most is what happens closest. So you don't miss anything, subscribe.
Subscribe
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits
_
#associations #judges #urge #CGPJ #establish #electronic #voting #transparency