The court will hold an urgent plenary session to decide whether to admit the PP’s appeal against the amendments that reform aspects of the judiciary within the repeal of the incitement offense.
Euskaraz irakurri: Botere Judiziala erreformatzeko zuzenketak geldiarazten dituen ala ez erabakiko du Auzitegi Konstituzionalak
The Constitutional Court will convene an extraordinary and urgent plenary session to decide whether to grant the appeal filed by the PP very gently paralyze processing partial changes to the proposal of law repealing the crime of seditionchanging the judiciary.
As reported by the Guarantee Court, this Wednesday the Amparo appeal filed by the PP group in Congress was entered in the court registry. The presentation of the case has fallen to the magistrate Enrique Arnaldo.
The appeal of the PP deputies is directed against the agreement of the Office of the Judiciary Committee this Monday, which allowed the partial amendments of the PSOE and Unidas Podemos under the bill that abolishes the crime of sedition.
In these amendments, the Spanish government groups propose moving from a three-fifths majority – which now requires at least 11 votes – to a simple majority for the CGPJ to nominate its two candidates for the TC and that, in the event that If the body continues to fail in its obligation to send two candidates, its members may be held criminally liable. The governing body of the judiciary has not been renewed for four years.
In addition, said amendment envisages that instead of each of the 18 members proposing and voting for two candidates, they will propose and vote only one candidate, which would guarantee that the two most voted candidates are those elected by each bloc of the Council (progressive and conservative).
The general secretary of the PP, Cuca Gamarra, has demanded that the guarantee court rule before next Thursday’s plenary session, which will debate the bill. Gamarra assures that they want to “enter through the back door the amendment of two organic laws to control the TC”, the law of the judiciary and that of the Constitutional Court.
Without precedents
The Constitutional Court has never paralyzed an ongoing legislative process over a single-party Amparo appeal, as the PP now claims.
According to legal sources cited by EFE, “there is no precedent in 40 years” in which a rule-making legislative process has been paralyzed by the filing of a protection request at the request of a parliamentary group. The sources explain that protection can be sought for a matter of parliamentary procedure, such as the Table’s agreements, but “there is no precedent for this protection to paralyze the parliamentary process“.
(function(d, s, id) {
var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
js.src = “//connect.facebook.net/es_ES/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.8”;
fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
}(document, ‘script’, ‘facebook-jssdk’));
Source: EITB
I am Ida Scott, a journalist and content author with a passion for uncovering the truth. I have been writing professionally for Today Times Live since 2020 and specialize in political news. My career began when I was just 17; I had already developed a knack for research and an eye for detail which made me stand out from my peers.
