After the meeting, the FA explained that the objective of the meeting was to “exchange” views with the union center and assured that they would carry out “an internal discussion” to assess whether or not they would take any action. Regarding the decision, they indicated that the roads between the Pit Cnt and the Broad Front “are independent.”
The legal expert, José Korzeniak, made a report at the request of the Pit Cnt where he analyzed the possibilities that the trade union central has to repeal the Social Security bill. This report was also presented by the union center to a delegation defined by the leadership of the Broad Front. The intention is to consider the possibility of challenging the regulations through “direct democracy mechanisms”, something that the opposition will also evaluate.
Regarding the referendum appeal against the laws, mentioned in art. 82 of the Constitution, Korzeniak assures that it is “unfeasible” since “laws that establish taxes” and those “in which the initiative is exclusive to the Executive Power” are excluded from this possibility.
Precisely, explains the expert, the last sentence of art. 86 establishes that “the initiative for the creation of jobs, endowments or retirements, or their increases, allocation or increase of pensions or pecuniary rewards, establishment or modifications of causes, calculations or retirement benefits will correspond, exclusively, to the Executive Power”.
“It is enough to read these texts to conclude without a doubt that the appeal for a referendum against this so-called social security reform law is not appropriate,” Korzeniak said.
On the other hand, the popular initiative of laws also provided for in the same law “is not appropriate either” according to the lawyer, “since the exclusions of said origin apply to those institutes”, that is to say to the referendum and the popular initiative. In this sense, he expressed that “it is very clear” that this mechanism is not constitutionally possible for this law.
Therefore, according to Korzeniak “the only procedure” of direct democracy constitutionally possible to repeal, annul or modify the law motivating the consultation, “would be the constitutional amendment.”
According to him, there are five procedures to amend the Constitution, regulated by art. 331 of the same. “Of them, the only feasible one -given the current political composition of Parliament- would be the “initiative of ten percent of the citizens registered in the National Civic Registry, presenting an articulated project that will be submitted to the President of the General Assembly, having to be submitted to the popular decision, in the most immediate election” (Art. Cited, section A)”.
Korzeniak clarified several things. In the first place that according to the Constitution, “the General Assembly, in a meeting of both Chambers, may formulate substitute projects that it will submit to the plebiscite decision, together with the popular initiative.”
And he added: “In the last paragraph of section C) of this article 331, it is established that the popular initiative will be submitted to a plebiscite in the next elections only when it has been presented at least six months in advance, to the date of those choices.”
He explained that, in the same paragraph, only three months notice is required for a possible replacement project of the General Assembly.
Korzeniak expressed that this report “is legally descriptive and does not imply politically promoting any decision.”
Meanwhile, the president of the Pit Cnt, Marcelo Abdala, explained that their objective is to “develop all legal consultations” to evaluate what mobilization they will carry out in opposition to the social security reform bill.
“This Tuesday the Secretariat is going to consider Dr. Korzeniak’s report and a decision process will be opened that will be adopted by the Pit Cnt, which naturally will not only involve the Secretariat, but the affiliates, the Representative Board, it is that is to say, the organisms in which the Pit Cnt does not resolve its orientations and its form of union action”, reported Abdala.
He reported that according to Korzeniak’s study, the only way to prevent the reform from being carried out is to carry out a constitutional amendment, where one of the mechanisms is to gather the signatures corresponding to 10% of the country’s electoral roll. Those signatures must be delivered within six months of the next national election.
“We are going to develop a discussion with all the dimensions, the edges of what a decision of this type involves, but the demands that this path implies are much less than those that we were in a position to resolve in the case of the Urgent Law Consideration where we got to gather 800,000 thousand signatures”, indicated Abdala.
And he clarified that there is still no resolution on the subject by the Pit Cnt.
For their part, from the Broad Front delegation they assured that “they do not rule out any action”, including the popular consultation.
“We came to talk with the union center, to receive some input from them, to exchange glances,” they said from the Broad Front. And they assured that they will carry out “an internal discussion” to evaluate whether they will take any action or not.
“We are going to report at the political table today and the Broad Front will begin a discussion process,” said the opposition delegation as they left the meeting with the Pit Cnt.
Regarding the decision, he indicated that the roads between the Pit Cnt and the Broad Front “are independent.” “Each of us has an organic, structural space for discussion and we have come to listen,” he said. And he maintained that they will evaluate what measure they will take once the entire political table of the FA meets.
Noelia Franco Agency Report
