A group of members wants to ensure that Congress listens to their opinion before voting on the bill
MADRID, July 10 (.) –
The General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) holds an extraordinary plenary session tomorrow to debate and vote on the proposal made by a group of members who advocate calling on the Congress of Deputies to seek the opinion of the governing body of the judges on the reform promoted by the PSOE to unlock the renewal of the Constitutional Court (TC).
The Plenary, which will begin at 5:00 p.m., has been convened at the request of this group of members so that the CGPJ deals with its proposal before Congress votes on this latest reform of the Organic Law of the Judiciary (LOPJ), since the The Government has asked the Lower House to address it within the framework of the Debate on the State of the Nation, which will be held this week, between July 12 and 14.
The object of controversy is the bill that the PSOE introduced on June 24 for the CGPJ to recover the power to make appointments in the Constitutional Court (TC) so that the four magistrates of the court of guarantees that they saw expire their mandate on June 12 can be replaced by another four that must be proposed by the Government and CGPJ, with two each.
Nine members reacted by proposing to the CGPJ “to ask Congress to obtain the report from the CGPJ in relation to the organic law proposal presented by the socialist parliamentary group for the reform of the LOPJ in the aspect related to the powers of this Council in the sense of also fully restore the attributions for judicial and governmental-judicial appointments of a discretionary nature”.
Likewise, these nine members seek that the governing body of the judges also address the European Commission to “inform” about the latest reform that the PSOE intends to make of the LOPJ and that involves amending the one of March 2021, by which The CGPJ was prevented from making discretionary appointments in the judicial leadership while in office, a situation in which it has been since December 2018.
SENSE OF URGENCY”
The proposal was scheduled to be studied in the plenary session scheduled for June 30, but the death of the member Victoria Cinto forced it to be suspended and the pending issues were automatically postponed to the next scheduled conclave, that of July 21.
However, after learning that the Government intends to have the reform of the LOPJ approved in Congress in the context of the Debate on the State of the Nation, the signatory members urged the president of the CGPJ, Carles Lesmes, to convene an extraordinary plenary session.
“The haste with which the processing of the legislative initiative is going to be carried out excludes that the plenary session of this Council scheduled for July 21 can be expected,” they argued.
The signatories argued that the sense of “urgency” is due to the fact that if the legal reform is approved this week, their final objective of sending the deputies a report with the opinion of the CGPJ that will help them face the parliamentary debate on it would lack already sense.
Lesmes not only agreed to convene the extraordinary plenary session but also added another matter to deal with: the request from the Governing Chamber of the Supreme Court to the CGPJ to convey to Congress and the Senate its deep concern because the lack of renewal of the Council and the impossibility discretionary appointments are creating an “untenable” situation in the high court.
TOWARDS A CONSENSUS TEXT
The sources of the governing body of the judges consulted by Europa Press point out that the members attend the appointment on Monday with the same spirit as that of June 30, that is, reach a consensus text.
Thus, they explain that the most controversial point, which would mean going to Brussels, could be sidelined to favor a joint declaration focused on denouncing the interim situation that the CGPJ has suffered for more than three years.
The same sources emphasize that the fact that the members are going to study the Supreme Court’s request beforehand could contribute to generating a climate of consensus that paves the way for reaching an agreement on the proposal of those nine members.