The Advice of the Judiciary adds a new chapter to the controversy over its formation. In this framework, two of its members were denounced for “serious breaches”. Is about Jimena of the Tower Y Diego Marias, whom they accuse of failing to suspend their registrations, as required by law. The presentation was received by the president of said organization, and also the head of the Supreme Court from Justice, Horace Rosatti.
The complainant group is Law Peopleheaded by the former president of the Public Bar Association of the Federal Capital, Jorge Rizzo. He himself sent a note of more than 40 pages to Rosatti, warning of “a very serious legal violation that makes the legal and moral incapacity of two members of the body.”
Rizzo argued that counselors De la Torre and Marías are required to suspend their federal registration because the law establishes that “the members of the Council of the Judiciary will be subject to the incompatibilities and immunities that govern their functional qualities.” Meanwhile, the Council’s law states: “Lawyers must suspend their federal registration for the duration of their duties.”
Another norm, the letter adds, “prevents lawyers who hold positions such as Counselor from exercising the profession. And a simple demonstration is not enough for this; not even a sworn statement is enough: they must disable their enrollment by filing the corresponding complaint with the Public School’s Enrollment Department”.
De la Torre and Marías in the Public School elections
According to the complaint, De la Torre and Marías did not comply with that requirement and, in addition, “advertised the list 67” that won the recent elections in the Public School. The new president of that institution will be, as of May 30, former federal cameraman and Minister of Justice Ricardo Gil Lavedra. In the elections that anointed him, neither De la Torre nor Marías cast their vote, despite the fact that – the complaint highlights – they could not do so.
“This circumstance is a notable violation provided by the aforementioned regulations that places the directors in the same condition as the magistrates when disposing of their disabilities, but what borders on bad faith. Or, worse still, with the ignorance of the Law, it is that by not having denounced said incompatibility, both lawyers appear in the list of registered voters authorized to vote, ”says the presentation before Rosatti.
Finally, Rizzo denounced “the total lack of respect for the rules that those accused here say come to enforce.” “It is necessary that this ‘new history’ of the Council of the Judiciary start off on the right foot and impose the maximum sanction provided for those who, being part of the Organism itself, unhealthily fail to comply with the express mandates of the laws of the Council and the College”, concluded the complainant.