The court may overturn a judge’s decision in Paran. That impedes the integration of the Judicial Council

The court may overturn a judge’s decision in Paran. That impedes the integration of the Judicial Council

It was at the request of the Bar Association that the institution initiated the case, which established the unconstitutionality of the current integration of the selection of judges and the supervisory body.

The court could announce a decision preventing his arrest as head of the Judicial Council
The court could announce a decision preventing his arrest as head of the Judicial Council

The Buenos Aires Bar AssociationWho launched a lawsuit that declared Georgia’s current integration unconstitutional Judicial CouncilAppeared earlier Supreme Court of Justice Request a decision Paranას Federal Judge Daniel AlonsoWhich – at the request of the entire front – was banned Congress Send their representatives to the new conformation of the organism.

The court can consider this request next Tuesday as it prepares for Monday to chair the Judicial Council.They told him ᲔᲠᲘ Sources close to the case.

In a document presented today and signed by its president Alberto GarayThe city’s bar association said Judge Alonso had imposed a restraining order of four hours in record time at the request of a lawmaker from Entre Rios. Marcelo CazarettoHinders the execution of a court judgment.

The decision of a federal judge is an inadmissible rebellion against a sentence imposed by the Supreme Court.“It violates the constitutional title of the highest, final judiciary, which the national constitution places in the Supreme Court.”

Along the same lines, lawyers affirmed that “the case has an obvious, unprecedented institutional seriousness” and that “there is no precedent in the annals of jurisprudence when a lower judge of the same jurisdiction arrives to challenge the final decision and is ready to be dictated by the Supreme Court.” This is a legal misconduct“.

Since this is a conflict arising in the judiciary, the lawyers asked the court to take action and Cancel everything that was done in Paran.. In addition, they train Demand for impeachment against Alonso.

The Supreme Court instructed in a lawsuit filed by the City Bar Association to pass a new law that would restore a balance between the political classes and lawyers and judges for the Judicial Council, or integrate a body of 20 members and a presidency. By the President of the Court, Horace Rosat. All this must be done by April 15, otherwise the Judicial Council will be closed.

Congress gave the bill a half sanction in the Senate, but the bill has not yet been considered by lawmakers. At the same time, a new advisor was elected to the 13-member board: two lawyers, a judge and another academic will be elected on Monday. But Congress must send two representatives: an MP and a senator for the second minority.

Judge Alonso has ruled in favor of Kirchner, a precautionary measure aimed at banning Congress from sending advisers until he receives a detailed report from the House of Representatives and Senate on the process he is handing over the matter. With this decision, as a tool, the ruling party is trying to spoil Rosat’s assumption.

But the City Bar Association, legitimized in the case, appeared in court with a document signed by its president, Garay, in which Demands to avoid closing the Judicial Council And today again in another letter in which he asks Judge Alonso to overturn the decision.

It is defended by a federal judge List of Celestes of the Association of MagistratesClosest to the government, his statement was sent to the Senate to promote him to the House, to a position where Macris proposed another candidate, and already has a history of aiding politics when he tried to oust him. Provincial Justice and accept federal A corruption case involving the brother of former governor Sergio Uribar, Juan Pablo Aguilera, was sentenced last week to six years in prison in another case.

The court will now analyze the Bar Association’s brief arguments to overturn Alonso’s decision, which are basically three:

– that advances to a restraining order imposed by a judge and Trying to prevent the execution of the final decision of the court.

– The means of filing an Amparo appeal by an MP does not work, because the law of Amparo itself says that. They do not match when they are articulated with the measures imposed by the court itself.

– The judge is incompetent because Jurisdiction belongs to the court itself or the court that intervened in the first instance In this case the council.

The lawyers’ briefing also cites a precedent set by the court less than 6 years ago in which it overturned a decision by the court through a sledgehammer. Mendoza Federal Judge Walter Bento, Which affected the ongoing litigation in another court. The court directly overturned Bento’s decision and found it The ambitious trial of this magistrate was not a means of entering into another pending case.

Garay’s presentation understands that the decision of a federal judge in Paranას interferes with the application of the court decision, and If Congress enforces it, it will complicate its implementationBecause it deprives him of sending his representatives to the Judicial Council.

Source: La Nacion

follow:
\