Federal Administrative Litigation judge Diego Martín Cormick declared null and void on Monday the measure that authorized the radical deputy Roxana Reyes to be a member of the Judicial Council, questioning the concept of “second minority” used to make that designation.
The judicial measure is analogous to the resolution of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation that recently questioned the appointment of the Peronist Martín Doñate as representative of the Upper House before the judicial body and ruled in favor of Luis Juez, of the PRO.
Thus, he considered that the Presidency of the Chamber should issue a new resolution, “not being able to grant the representation of the third space to the Radical Civic Union”.
The magistrate, who had previously refused to issue a precautionary measure in this sense, made the decision before the amparo action promoted by the head of the bloc of deputies of the Frente de Todos, Germán Martínez, who maintained that Resolution 689/22 of the presidency of the Chamber violates the principle of “balance” established in article 114 of the National Constitution.
The questioned resolution, of April 20, 2022, when Sergio Massa was president of the Lower House, provided “to designate the deputy of the Nation Roxana Reyes as a titular member of the second minority” to integrate the body that sanctions and participates in the selection of national judges.
Martínez maintained that Reyes belongs to the Radical Civic Union (UCR), which is a member of Together for Change, which has already appointed a House legislator to represent him in the Council.
The case is similar to that of Doñate: the Court ruled against his appointment at the end of his term and the Frente de Todos insisted on his candidacy for the period 2022-2026, which is being analyzed again by the highest court. .
With Reyes, it now happens that the judge upholds Martínez’s objection to his appointment in April, but it is proposed again.
Comunicate of @deputadosucr
Judge Cormick’s ruling is arbitrary, political, null and untimely. pic.twitter.com/a12T8qnTBe— UCR Block – HCDN (@diputadosucr) November 28, 2022
The list of the four representatives of the lower house was then made up of two representatives of the Frente de Todos (Vanesa Siley and Rodolfo Tailhade), one of the PRO (Alvaro González) and Reyes, for the UCRto whom the Supreme Court of the Nation decided to take an oath to carry out their positions for the period 2022-2026.
The judge considered that, according to what was stated by Martínez, “it is evident that the spirit of the law is to grant a place to three different political spaces” corresponding, according to his criteria, to “two members of the political party that has the greatest number of votes, and one member to each of the following”.
He added that the current “assignment of representatives is carried out with legislators elected in the elections held in 2019 and 2021” and that “in both electoral processes the Frente de Todos (Justicialista Party and others), constituted an alternative to vote; and the Frente Juntos for Change (PRO, UCR, Civic Coalition), another”.
For the judge, “Granting a member to the block made up of the PRO and another member to the UCR block would prevent the real second minority of the chamber from participating.”
Thus, he considered that the Presidency of the Chamber should issue a new resolution, “not being able to grant the representation of the third space to the Radical Civic Union.”
Fault known, The block of national deputies of the UCR considered through a statement that “Judge Cormick’s ruling is arbitrary, political, null and untimely.”
He added that “it has been dictated contrary to the law with the sole objective of generating confusion” and that “it lacks any legal effect by nullifying a resolution that has lost its validity for having exhausted its object.”
“The mandate resulting from that resolution ended on November 18 of this year, with which the annulment provided for in the ruling has been on an abstract issue that inhibits the judge from resolving,” they said from the bench chaired by Mario Negri.
In this sense, they maintained that “without being the object of the action, Judge Cormick enters into an interpretation of the guidelines for the appointment of representatives of the Chamber of Deputies in the Council of the Magistracy that openly contradicts Law 24,937 and of improper way ‘intimates’ the Chamber of Deputies of the Nation to designate the representatives in the Council in a way that is not provided for in the law”.
“There has been an attempt to generate confusion and institutional anxiety with the obvious intention of compensating with the issue raised with the representation of the minority corresponding to the Senate,” the radical deputies remarked.
