The president of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), Vicente Guilarte, has sided with the progressives to show his disagreement with the decision to declare Álvaro García unsuitable to revalidate his position as attorney general of the State, at the proposal of the Government .
Guilarte has signed a private vote with progressive voices Roser Bach, Clara Martínez de Careaga, Álvaro Cuesta, Mar Cabrejas and Pilar Sepúlveda, warning that the conservative bloc has gone too far when it comes to valuing García Ortiz.
In the dissenting vote, the members point out that the report declaring García unsuitable for the position is not "coherent" with the rest of the reports that have been made regarding other candidates for state attorney general.
The vote shows that the Plenary Session of this CGPJ has reported on six occasions on proposals made by the Council of Ministers for the appointment of the State Attorney General. On all these occasions - he recalls - the Plenary has maintained "a constant criterion of limited judgment of the suitability of the candidates proposed by the Council of Ministers, limiting the examination to compliance with the legally established requirements and merits."
For the progressives, proof was the plenary debate on October 27, 2016 on the appointment of Manuel Maza. If applicable, the scope of the report on the suitability of the candidate was addressed and the position of the members who advocated a broad examination of the professional career and merits of the proposed person was rejected, "being that the aforementioned members cast a dissenting vote supporting his stance".
This has been the first time that a Council reports against a candidate for attorney general, who must demonstrate his fifteen years as a jurist of recognized prestige. On this occasion, the conservative majority of the plenary session has considered that in addition to reviewing that he meets the formal requirements - which he does - they should also review his last year as attorney general, replacing Dolores Delgado, to assess his suitability.
This report is mandatory but not binding. However, it reflects the increasingly high tension within the Council itself, which today celebrates five years of its expired mandate.
In this regard, the association to which García belongs, the Progressive Union of Prosecutors (UPF), has shown its "sadness and concern at the serious inaccuracies and unsupported statements made" in the unsuitability report.
The report alleged against García, among other things, his policy of appointments in favor of prosecutors who come from the same association, the Progressive Union of Prosecutors (UPF). It states that of the 33 discretionary appointments assigned this last year, 22 of them have been in members of the program associated with the UPF, which has 200 associates of the 2,700 total of the program (7.4%), which which means that it represents 66.6% of discretionary positions.
On the other hand, both this association and the progressive Judges for Democracy have issued a statement today requesting the resignation of the president and members of the CGPJ to force the renewal of the body, which has expired for five years.
"This institutional abnormality represents an obvious detriment to society and the judicial organization. The Supreme Court suffers from more and more vacancies, the majority of the presidencies of the Court and Superior Courts of Justice are in office and the lack of leadership of the CGPJ hinders the work of courts and tribunals. Those who go to the Judiciary to litigate, legal professionals, and society in general, suffer the harm of this situation," they emphasize.
These two associations blame the PP for making "numerous excuses" for refusing to negotiate an agreement with the PSOE, since three-fifths of the chamber is needed to appoint the twenty members that make up the body of judges.
"It seems to us that those who remain as members of the CGPJ contribute decisively to maintaining this situation that violates the Constitution and the Organic Law of the Judiciary. People who, due to their profession and responsibility, are obliged to guarantee compliance with both, and with the legal system, They extend their mandate without credibility, without legitimacy and without any shame," they add.
Five have been from the conservative Association of Prosecutors, which has 630 associates (that is, 23% of the career) and represents 15% of the discretionary positions. And 4 to non-members, which are the highest percentage of the race (970), which means having designated only 12% of those who represent 40%. The UPF says that these data are erroneous.
The report alleged against García, among other things, his policy of appointments in favor of prosecutors who come from the same association, the Progressive Union of Prosecutors (UPF). It states that of the 33 discretionary appointments assigned this last year, 22 of them have been in members of the program associated with the UPF, which has 200 associates of the 2,700 total of the program (7.4%), which which means that it represents 66.6% of discretionary positions.
On the other hand, both this association and the progressive Judges for Democracy have issued a statement today requesting the resignation of the president and members of the CGPJ to force the renewal of the body, which has expired for five years.
"This institutional abnormality represents an obvious detriment to society and the judicial organization. The Supreme Court suffers from more and more vacancies, the majority of the presidencies of the Court and Superior Courts of Justice are in office and the lack of leadership of the CGPJ hinders the work of courts and tribunals. Those who go to the Judiciary to litigate, legal professionals, and society in general, suffer the harm of this situation," they emphasize.
These two associations blame the PP for making "numerous excuses" for refusing to negotiate an agreement with the PSOE, since three-fifths of the chamber is needed to appoint the twenty members that make up the body of judges.
"It seems to us that those who remain as members of the CGPJ contribute decisively to maintaining this situation that violates the Constitution and the Organic Law of the Judiciary. People who, due to their profession and responsibility, are obliged to guarantee compliance with both, and with the legal system, They extend their mandate without credibility, without legitimacy and without any shame," they add.
