The General Council for the Judiciary calls the future law a ‘measure to abolish the rule of law’. Moreover, members have defended themselves against criticism that the CGPJ should wait for knowledge of the draft law before issuing its opinion.
The General Council for the Judiciary (CGPJ), with a conservative majority and an expired mandate, approved this Monday an institutional declaration against the future amnesty law before you know its exact contents. The CGPJ therefore calls it a “measure to abolish the rule of law”, which is “contrary to the constitution” and turns justice into “a chimera”.
Legal sources have reported that the proposal debated by the Council in an extraordinary plenary session, at the request of eight conservative members, has gone ahead with the votes of the initiators of the initiative joined by member Wenceslao Olea. the five progressive members and the abstention from President Vicente Guilarte.
The sources assure that Guilarte has informed members that he will write an explanation of his blank vote in which he will show that he does not agree with the legislative initiative, but considers it advisable to await the consideration of the bill.
Cuesta is not present at the plenary meeting
Progressive member Álvaro Cuesta, who considered the proposed institutional declaration on the amnesty “manifestly illegal”, did not attend the plenary.
As a result, the eight members’ proposal no longer needed more support to move forward as the number of members present was reduced to fifteen and the votes of the eight conservative members were sufficient for its approval.
The original text, modified
Members amended the original text of the institutional declaration, which was adopted without the Cortes asking the Council for an opinion on a accountthe contents of which are still unknown have not registered.
On the latter, they defend themselves against criticism within and outside the Council, which insists that the CGPJ must wait for knowledge of the draft law before issuing an opinion, affirming its “legitimacy” to “do it now”, since It has not yet been decided whether to present the amnesty as a billthus avoiding the advice of the state advisory bodies.
“The parties promoting the legislative initiative, the same parties that support the actions of the caretaker government, announce that they have opted for the parliamentary procedure that allows them to do without such reports. That is why absurd that we are being asked to wait to do something that could not be done because the path that prevents it was deliberately chosen,” the statement said.
In this context, the Council specifies that “this Council does not discuss the powers of the parliamentary groups with representation in the Cortes to make any proposals for laws that they consider relevant; wisely respect the fundamental rights of citizens and the powers reserved by the Constitution to the judiciary.”
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.
