The constitutional lawyer Eduardo Barcesat considered this Saturday that the ruling of the Supreme Court of Justice (CSJN), which ordered that the Nation allocate 2.95 percent of the volume of co-participating taxes to the City of Buenos Aires generated the “conflict of powers most serious since the recovery of democracy”
“The precautionary resolution of the Court suspends the application of the Decree of the President (Alberto Fernández) and the law of Congress that ratified the aliquots provided. That is, stands against a law voted in both houses of parliament. It is correct to describe this conflict between powers as the most serious since the recovery of democracy“, said Barcesat in statements to Radio La Red.
For the lawyer, “inexplicably”, the Court did not take into account in this resolution that “it is also governing the National Budget Law, which is the law of laws, as some call it.”
“It is the norm that regulates the financial economic movement of the entire country. In any case It would have been appropriate to broaden the procedural purpose by requesting the unconstitutionality of the Budget Law. But that would have been the last straw. They would just need to ask for the unconstitutionality of the law of gravity and with that they would end the nonsense“, he remarked.
In this sense, Barcesat evaluated that the decision of the highest court created a situation “of predicament”, because “whatever it does”, the national Executive is left in a situation in which “it always violates an obligation”.
“If you listen to the Court, you would be breaking the Budget Law and to the detriment of the provinces”he claimed.
Within this framework, Barcesat maintained that the Government “is obliged to disobey the Court reproaching and looking for institutional ways so that this ruling is rendered null and void”.
“For this, the Executive has proposed two measures with the endorsement of the governors to challenge the four members of the Court and to present the request to revoke the precautionary resolution issued,” he said.
And he pointed out that “some say that the Court is not going to accept his recusal or the appeal for his reinstatement and that is where the conflict becomes greater.”
“I have advised that, in parallel to these measures, the request for impeachment and removal of the four members of the Court be promoted.. We must notify the Chamber of Deputies that they already have more than 28 requests against these magistrates not to cross their arms and to investigate, to call the experts to discuss, “he assured.
On the other hand, he criticized the ruling when referring to the Progress Clause of the National Constitution that establishes “the obligation of Congress to attend to and equalize the conditions of existence in the different provinces and regions” and that means “contributing more for those in worse situation”.
In addition, he pointed out that It is “something unusual” to make room for the suspension of the presidential decree after two years since “one of the requirements of the precautionary measures is urgency” and pointed out that during this time there was “no affectation in the services provided by the Government of the City of Buenos Aires”.
