Justice has approved the appointment of radical MP Roxana Reyes to the Judicial Council

The Federal Chamber of Administrative Litigation endorses the appointment of the national deputy of the UCR Roxana Reyes as a member of the Nation’s Judicial Council by overturning a first instance decision which in November last year challenged the appointment of the legislator.

Members of Chamber II of the Chamber, Jose Luis Lopez Castineira, Maria Caputi and Luis Marquez pointed out that the interrogation of the president of the Frente de Todos bloc, german martinezhad brought against Reyes was due to the previous composition of the Council and that the trial judge Martin Cormick reigned for the current integration.

“Under the conditions described, it is verified that he has not raised or requested anything with regard to future resolutions”, the maids stated in their 69-page resolution that they accepted GlobeLiveMedia on what was requested by Martínez in his amparo. Thus, the judges declared “nullity of the judgment rendered in this case dated 28/11/22, which is devoid of any legal effect with the scope expressed in the preceding recitals”.

You may be interested: Judicial Council: A judge questioned the nomination of Roxana Reyes and said that the PRO and the UCR cannot have two seats

The story of the case goes back to last year when, since April, the Council – the body responsible for selecting and prosecuting state and federal judges and administering the judiciary – had to be integrated to 20 members after the Supreme Court ruling that declared its 13-member membership unconstitutional.

One more seat corresponded to the Chamber of Deputies and Reyes was proposed on behalf of the bloc of the second minority which was that of the UCR. But Martínez opposed this decision and claimed the place of Frente de Todos. The legislator declared that as the first majority He was entitled to two places – as established by law – and that he would only have one.

Reyes joined the Council and after his term expired last November, the matter remained unresolved. The legislator was again proposed for the composition of the Council 2022-2026 and her name accepted by the Supreme Court to be sworn in.

On November 22, Judge Cormick decided the case. The magistrate questioned whether Reyes would not represent the true second parliamentary minority in the House. And he did it on the basis of the Supreme Court decision by which he removed the senator from the Frente de Todos Make a donation because the Senate bloc was divided so that it assumed in the Council when the place corresponded to the opposition.

“Members of the PRO and UCR blocs have, in effect, been part of the same list of candidates to vote, both in 2021 and previously in 2019. Therefore, they would be given dual representation where the law is clear in insofar as it seeks to represent three different political spaces. By granting one member to the bloc constituted by the PRO, and another member to the UCR bloc, the real second minority of the Chamber would be prevented from participating, committing a situation, in fact, similar to that analyzed by the Court in the aforementioned judgment . decision. “, said the judge in his resolution. The PRO and the UCR in the deputies have separate blocks.

You may be interested: Kirchnerism ratified his criticism of the Court in the oath of senators to the Council of the Judiciary

For this reason, the President of the Chamber of Deputies, Cecilia Moreau, withdrew from the Court the names of the deputies for the Council. Despite this, the Supreme Court swore Reyes, PRO’s Alvaro González and Vanesa Siley and Rodolfo Tailhade From the Front of All. They were sworn in late last year, and Kirchner lawmakers did so under protest of Reyes’ oath.

Cormick’s decision was appealed and today the House overturned it. Members of the chamber pointed out that Martínez’s proposal did not cover the new period of the Council for which Reyes took office, but rather the previous one. And that in the current Frente de Todos had its two representatives.

“It is verified that he has not raised or asked anything with regard to future resolutions, nor with regard to periods after the one indicated (2018-2022), even less with regard to resolutions to be issued by the presidency of the H Chamber of Deputies to comply with future mandates, such as the predicate of refraining from appointing deputies who make up the second minority with political parties or alliances to which members of the majority or the first minority had already been affected,” the chamber members said.

The decision may be appealed to the Supreme Court of Justice.

Continue reading: