The Cal decided to open a disciplinary process against JNJ lawyers for initiating an investigation against Janet Tello.
The National Justice Board He issued a statement through his social networks in which he rejected that The Lima Bar Association (Cal) has decided to open a disciplinary process against its members after having initiated an investigation against Janet Tello, president of the Judiciary. According to lime, JNJ could be incurring a very serious offense.
“Given the Resolution of the College of Ethics of the Lima Bar Association of February 19, 2025, which opens a ex officio disciplinary procedure against the members of this National Justice Board, it is necessary to express our energetic rejection in the face of an undoubtedly lacking act of foundation and legality, “reads.
It should be remembered that the investigation opened by the JNJ, an agency chaired by Gino Ríos Patio, against Tello, is due to an alleged mistake that the president of the PJ would have made when resolving a process of a labor nature when I was a member of the First Constitutional Law Chamber and transitory social of the Supreme Court.
The president of the PJ has had a frontal attitude against the Boluarte government and has highlighted the need to maintain the independence of powers and autonomy of the justice system. He has even said not feeling threatened with the decision. “I receive it with surprise, it cannot be that it is an immediate process to question jurisdictional criteria on which the JNJ has no competence,” he said.
Jnj would commit constitutional infraction, according to Tello’s lawyer
The National Board of Justice (JNJ) could be incurring a constitutional violation when initiating an urgent disciplinary procedure against the president of the Judiciary, Janet Tello, according to his lawyer, Luciano López, in an interview with RPP.
López argued that the JNJ does not have the authority to initiate a process in a case that is still pending resolution, such as that of Retiro Colonel Julio Ramón Cadenillas Díaz, who presented an amparo action against the resolution that is now the object of the immediate procedure . This amparo action was already resolved, determining that the rights of chain had not been violated. This fact, according to the lawyer, questions the legality of the disciplinary procedure initiated by the JNJ.
