The suppression of the crime of sedition, agreed by Pedro Sánchez with ERC, will not be informed by the General Council of the Judiciary. The governing body of the judges has rejected this Thursday the proposal of eight members proposed by the PP to rule on this important reform of the Penal Code after the Executive has used a route -a bill presented by PSOE and Podemos- that evades the mandatory CGPJ report.

Two members also proposed by the PP, Wenceslao Olea and Vicente Guilarte, have prevented the initiative from prospering of the majority group of the CGPJ, since the first has voted blank and the second has voted against the preparation of a report on the elimination of sedition, the crime for which the leaders of the Catalan independence process were convicted and whose disappearance of the Penal Code can benefit, singularly, those who have not yet been tried.

If they had joined their group of origin, the initiative would have gone ahead, since the majority sector has -theoretically- 10 of the current 18 members of the General Council of the Judiciary.

[Sánchez recurre otra vez a la vía exprés para rebajar la sedición sin oír al CGPJ y al Consejo de Estado]

The letter from the members of the majority sector recalled that European standards “require that all regulatory proposals that affect the Judiciary must be submitted to a prior report from the Councils of Justice.”

In this sense, opinion 24 (2021) of the Consultative Council of European Judges was sent, which states that “any regulatory project likely to have an impact on the Judiciary and the independence of judges, or on the guarantees of access of citizens to Justice, should be submitted to the opinion of the Council of Justice, before its deliberation by Parliament”.

He also recalled that the European Network of Councils for Justice, in its 2010-2011 report on Councils for Justice, indicates that legislative proposals relating to the courts or the Judiciary must be submitted to a report by the Council of Justice.

In addition, he pointed out, that there are precedents in this Council for issuing reports on bills.

[El CGPJ debatirá hacer un informe sobre la supresión de la sedición aunque el Gobierno eluda pedírselo]

“It is striking that on repeated occasions we find ourselves with important reforms that affect the Judiciary and that, instead of being processed as bills by the Government, it is the parliamentary groups that support the Government that present them in the Congress of Deputies as bills, thus obviating the mandatory report process of this Council General of the Judiciary if it had been processed in another way,” the text indicates.

The law provides that the CGPJ report on bills that, among other matters, carry out penal reforms.

But if that same modification of the Criminal Penal Code is channeled as a bill of the parliamentary groups, the norm does not expressly establish that it has to be informed by the CGPJ.

The proposal has been voted in favor by its eight subscribers (José Antonio Ballestero, Carmen Llombart, Gerardo Martínez Tristán, Juan Martínez Moya, Juan Manuel Fernández, María Ángeles Carmona, Nuria Díaz Abad and José María Macías).

Against The eight members proposed by PSOE, IU and PNV have voted, to which Guilarte has joined.

Source: Elespanol

Disclaimer: If you need to update/edit/remove this news or article then please contact our support team Learn more

J. A. Allen

Author, blogger, freelance writer. Hater of spiders. Drinker of wine. Mother of hellions.

Leave a Reply