The negotiations within the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) to designate the two candidates for the Constitutional Court (TC) that fall under the CGPJ have run aground because the progressive members insist on maintaining the candidacy of the Supreme Court (TS) magistrate Jose Manuel Bandres and their conservative peers to claim other names, which means that, for now, the only agreement is to hold a first vote on December 22.
According to the sources of the government body of the judges consulted, the series of meetings that have taken place since the Government appointed its two candidates for the Constitutional Court last Tuesday – the former minister Juan Carlos Field and the former high office of Moncloa Laura Diez– have served for the progressive and conservative spokesmen to confirm to the other party that they remain in the positions established on November 16.
That day, the conservative members told their interlocutors the need to change the negotiation method. They proposed that, instead of each block proposing a candidate that was automatically assumed by the other, both currents would put several names on the table to choose the two candidates for the constitutional Court jointly.
This movement took place after on November 3 the progressive members nominated bandresthus reducing the list of nine candidates that they launched last October, so from this sector the rule change proposed by the conservative negotiators is perceived as a disguised veto of the magistrate of the supreme courtsince formally -they point out- they have not formulated any fault.
At this juncture, the negotiating commission – made up of José Antonio Ballestero and Carmen Llombart, on the conservative side; Y Alvaro Cuesta and Roser Bachon the progressive side – was summoned for November 30, last Wednesday, to try to unblock the talks, but said meeting was overshadowed by the appointment of Campo y Díez.
The conservatives asked the progressives for more time to assess the impact of Moncloa’s appointments on the CGPJ negotiations and that same day at night they held an internal conclave in which they agreed to leave the issue of Campo and Díez on the sidelines -although some members They believe that they are excessively politicized profiles that the Council should compensate by sending blameless candidates to the TC from the point of view of impartiality.
Once the matter of Campo y Díez was resolved, the negotiating commission met again on Thursday morning. The conservatives had an impact on demanding more names from the progressives, in addition to Bandrés, and the latter debated it in an internal meeting that same afternoon that ended with the decision to maintain the sole candidacy of this magistrate of the Chamber of Contentious-Supreme Administrative.
Thus, this same Friday the progressive members have transferred to their conservative colleagues that they are not willing to debate the “suitability and opportunity” of Bandrés’s candidacy, nor the “suitability and opportunity” of the candidates that the conservative sector may announce.
