CGPJ member Álvaro Cuesta asks to call off tomorrow's plenary session against the amnesty, considering it "illegal"

MADRID, 5 Nov. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The progressive member of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) Álvaro Cuesta has requested that the extraordinary plenary session scheduled for this Monday by the president of the body, Vicente Guilarte, be called off to debate a proposed institutional declaration against the amnesty.

"It is manifestly illegal," Cuesta stressed in a statement in which he announced that he will not attend if the plenary session goes ahead, which he considers "contrary to the legal system and the constitutional functions" of the CGPJ.

"I will not be the one who contributes to the indignity and discredit that members elected by the Cortes in 2013 can be considered rebellious against initiatives of the Parliament legitimately elected on July 23, 2023, placing their names next to decisions that tarnish the name of this CGPJ, once it is out of its jurisdictional and temporal orbit, as its mandate has expired, even though it remains in office after ten years," he explained.

Cuesta has warned that Guilarte's call is "inadmissible and illegal" for "not meeting all the requirements of article 600.2 of the LOPJ." This indicates that an extraordinary session can be held only for the exercise of some of the powers referred to in article 599.

Among them is not considered "neither reporting possible or unknown proposals of law, nor political pacts, nor other legislative or parliamentary initiatives of the groups, nor intentions or programs of Government or investiture, nor approving proclamations or party political declarations", he recalled. the progressive vocal.

Likewise, he highlighted that the call for a plenary session is not legal "because it interferes in the autonomy of Parliament, in the constitutional provisions on the investiture debate of the President of the Government."

In his opinion, this session "leads the CGPJ into an unfair institutional confrontation with the President of the Government, the Parliamentary Groups and the Congress of Deputies."

Cuesta has also questioned the CGPJ's intended proclamation as representing a "very serious irresponsibility" that could "contribute, encourage, promote or incite political, social or institutional tension, generating social alarm, attacks on democratic institutions or public disorders."

Furthermore, he has warned that it could "usurp oversight powers that do not correspond to the CGPJ, grossly interfering in the investiture debate and, where appropriate, conditioning the independence and activity of judges and courts."

In this context, he pointed out that the CGPJ "does not have the authority to issue statements on legislative proposals, unless Congress has requested it to do so" and, he added, "neither the Constitution, nor the legal system nor the LOPJ bind the Parliament to request a prior report on the content of these proposals".

"The European Union does not ask or require Spain, nor its members, that parliamentary initiatives for reform in matters of Amnesty, Justice, Judicial Statute, Organization, Procedures or Fundamental Rights be previously submitted to a report from the Superior Councils of the Judiciary. ", has added.

Finally, it has stressed that the CGPJ "does not have the authority to interfere in the prior processing of a proposal, nor can it be attributed the powers or functions of censor, guardian of essences, judge of constitutionality or issuer of prior certifications of quality of the parliamentary initiatives, of the deputies or senators and their groups, before the Chambers or the Government itself pronounce themselves.

"The CGPJ does not have a monopoly on the defense of the Rule of Law nor can it become the preeminent power compared to the rest of the powers and constitutional bodies. The CGPJ is not the Judicial Branch, it does not represent judges and magistrates, it does not exercise any function jurisdictional," he declared.