Post by account_disabled on Mar 8, 2024 22:26:27 GMT -5
The judicial year is inaugurated on the same day that one more judge from the Supreme Court retires and on which the current acting president of the General Council of the Judiciary celebrates his birthday. On a day like today, a little less than a year after Lesmes' resignation, and despite the forceful speech of the president of the Supreme Court , Francisco Marín, the feeling that some of the members of the CGPJ gave off was that of resignation in the face of the blockade. of the governing body of the judges. However, according to Council sources, the governing body of the judges could request a meeting with the political leaders to try to convey in person the seriousness of the situation and invite them to make an effort to bring positions closer together.
The boredom is evident in the face of a situation that has gone on for too long - with the CGPJ with a mandate that has expired for almost five years - and that is bringing Fax Lists Justice "to the brink of collapse" , according to what the President of the Supreme Court himself stated in his speech. . The governing body of the judges is already eager for a movement and there are those who even express certain doubts about its “legitimacy” . It is obvious, says a prominent member of the CGPJ, that a reform of the system of election of judges must be undertaken, although they point out that, at this point, the first thing must be the reform with the current system and then undertake the change of model.
Beyond the official speeches, at the opening ceremony of the judicial year there was a lot of talk about Carles Puigdemont, the way in which he could condition a future Government and the constitutional fit of an amnesty law. Renowned jurists have not denied the constitutional fit of a possible amnesty , nor have they stated the opposite. According to some of those attending the event, the issue would have to be thoroughly studied to be able to give an opinion on it, although they believe that the legislator, in principle, could approve this law if it reaches the necessary consensus.
If this rule were approved, the constitutionality of which some prominent jurist has defended by comparing it with that of 1977 - prepared by the same Cortes that would later approve the Constitution -, the judges would have to apply it, although it is clear that there are those who could raise a question of constitutionality before the Constitutional Court. If the court of guarantees ruled contrary to the norm... no one dares to say what the effect would be. There are those who venture that, once this question is presented, the judges would delay the processes as much as possible until they know the meaning of the TC ruling.
Another issue that jurists note is that, although they point out that the current position is a maximum position, what is being proposed by the pro-independence supporters is an amnesty that is not limited to the specific events that happened during the Procés, but rather It would have an indeterminate scope to protect other actions within the framework of the independence cause.
Fiscal sources have warned that they would have nothing to say in the hypothetical processing of this rule, unless it was done in the form of a bill and they were consulted, but that would be once the Government was formed , since they would not be able to present it. being in office. Or in the event that it were appealed before the Constitutional Court.
The boredom is evident in the face of a situation that has gone on for too long - with the CGPJ with a mandate that has expired for almost five years - and that is bringing Fax Lists Justice "to the brink of collapse" , according to what the President of the Supreme Court himself stated in his speech. . The governing body of the judges is already eager for a movement and there are those who even express certain doubts about its “legitimacy” . It is obvious, says a prominent member of the CGPJ, that a reform of the system of election of judges must be undertaken, although they point out that, at this point, the first thing must be the reform with the current system and then undertake the change of model.
Beyond the official speeches, at the opening ceremony of the judicial year there was a lot of talk about Carles Puigdemont, the way in which he could condition a future Government and the constitutional fit of an amnesty law. Renowned jurists have not denied the constitutional fit of a possible amnesty , nor have they stated the opposite. According to some of those attending the event, the issue would have to be thoroughly studied to be able to give an opinion on it, although they believe that the legislator, in principle, could approve this law if it reaches the necessary consensus.
If this rule were approved, the constitutionality of which some prominent jurist has defended by comparing it with that of 1977 - prepared by the same Cortes that would later approve the Constitution -, the judges would have to apply it, although it is clear that there are those who could raise a question of constitutionality before the Constitutional Court. If the court of guarantees ruled contrary to the norm... no one dares to say what the effect would be. There are those who venture that, once this question is presented, the judges would delay the processes as much as possible until they know the meaning of the TC ruling.
Another issue that jurists note is that, although they point out that the current position is a maximum position, what is being proposed by the pro-independence supporters is an amnesty that is not limited to the specific events that happened during the Procés, but rather It would have an indeterminate scope to protect other actions within the framework of the independence cause.
Fiscal sources have warned that they would have nothing to say in the hypothetical processing of this rule, unless it was done in the form of a bill and they were consulted, but that would be once the Government was formed , since they would not be able to present it. being in office. Or in the event that it were appealed before the Constitutional Court.