Despite the fact that the bicameral commission in charge of the bill on domain forfeiture trials for the civil forfeiture of illicit assets rendered a favorable report on the controversial initiative in the last session of the Senate, it has not yet been defined whether it is a organic or ordinary law.
It would be in the next week when it will be decided whether or not the piece touches on fundamental rights, this through the plenary vote on the dissident report submitted by Yván Lorenzo, spokesman for the PLD caucus in that chamber. The motion seeks to ensure that the law is organic, so it proposes a change to its title so that it reads: “organic law on domain forfeiture trials for the civil forfeiture of illicit assets.”
The report of the bill states that “the extinction of domain ‘does not contravene in any way the right of property’, since the assets acquired with illicit capital do not acquire legitimacy or enjoy any legal protection.” Despite this precision, the commission that worked on the piece left the Senate to decide if it is ordinary or not.
This occurs in the wake of criticisms that have been expressed by various specialists in constitutional law and legislators, and with the exception of the debates around other aspects of the piece, such as retrospectiveness, tax avoidance, double prosecution, presumption of innocence, among other points.
Given the refusal of the opposition to support the piece as it is and the number of legislators that the ruling party has, defining whether it is an organic or ordinary law is essential to know if it will be approved or not, since given the above, the only way for both chambers to sanction it would be to pass it as a law that “does not affect fundamental rights”, that is, as ordinary.
Aware of the dilemma, the spokesman for the Perremeist deputies, Julito Fulcar, said they “do not understand the reasons” why “certain sectors” are focusing on whether the piece is organic or ordinary, when that is not the substance of the debate, without However, he reiterated that even if there is no consensus with the opposition, the PRM will approve the legislation. Showing your reservation.
“That is a discussion, we are going to see what the Senate says. The Senate is going to give its vision and after the Senate gives its vision, then the Chamber of Deputies will give (ours)”, Alfredo Pacheco specified a few days ago, in an interview on the Hoy Mismo program. The legislator said this after emphasizing that he “does not want to get into that discussion,” however, he explained that the bill mandates the creation of a special jurisdiction, which is neither criminal nor civil, which “does not regulate fundamental rights.”
PRM say it is ordinary law
For the PRM senators and members of the commission in charge of legislation Faride Raful, PRM spokeswoman in the Chamber; and Pedro Catrain, president of the entourage, it is an ordinary law. Contrary to the position of several jurists and opposition legislators.
The organic laws require for their approval the vote of two thirds of the quorum in both chambers, and the ordinary ones half plus one.
The ruling party has a majority in both chambers.
It was after giving a lecture at PUCMM
The spark that ignited the debate on whether the law is organic or not, arose after the discussion “analysis of the domain extinction bill” that was organized by the Senate, the Chamber of Deputies and the Pontificia Universidad Católica Madre y Maestra ( PUCMM), held in the auditorium of the high house of studies, on June 28. That day, Marko Magdic and Olivo Rodríguez Huertas, two of the five exhibitors, affirmed that the piece of law is ordinary.
