Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook
Featured Feijóo Japón Pedro Sánchez Ciudadanos Educación

President of the CGPJ says that the amnesty law is a "political transaction": "It is the counterpart for the investiture"

He presents a document in which he explains that he abstained from the Plenary vote to maintain a certain "neutrality".

- 2 reads.

President of the CGPJ says that the amnesty law is a "political transaction": "It is the counterpart for the investiture"

He presents a document in which he explains that he abstained from the Plenary vote to maintain a certain "neutrality"

The interim president of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), Vicente Guilarte, defends that he abstained last Thursday in the vote on the two reports that the Plenary Session had on the table related to the amnesty law proposal for the "evident political component" of the norm, which he calls a "political transaction" and a "counterpart" for "the investiture of Pedro Sánchez with the vote in favor of all the Junts deputies."

This is explained in a nine-page document, collected by Europa Press, in which he justifies his blank vote by considering that it was "prudent to maintain a certain neutrality" in the face of a bill that, in his opinion, is used as a "as a instrument of political activity" since it understands that "its approval is the counterpart for the support of its beneficiaries for the investiture of the President of the Government."

Guilarte insists that "there are no precedents, neither in Spain nor in the rest of the nations in which similar grace measures have been agreed, where the amnesty has been inserted in a synallagmatic transaction, with mutual benefits."

For the interim president of the governing body of judges, the bill approved in Congress "has a relatively simulated cause in the terms in which the explanatory statement describes it." In his understanding, the purpose of the norm is not to promote the "political and coexistence pacification of Catalonia" - which "was never previously outlined in the electoral program" of the PSOE - but rather a mere "political transaction."

Guilarte reviews the arguments outlined by the two speakers of the reports that were put to the vote: that of the member of the conservative wing Wenceslao Olea - who received nine votes and saw the law as unconstitutional - and that of the member of the sector progressive Mar Cabrejas - which had five supports and defended that it had a place in the Magna Carta -.

He assures that if the report on the amnesty law "had been limited to the analysis of its articles, without entering into the debate on its constitutionality, a single report would have been approved since everything discussed regarding these issues obeys a legal logic which practically all of us would have agreed on. "The polarity that harasses us has prevented it," he maintains.

On the sidelines, he emphasizes that neither of the two reports analyzed by the Plenary address "the unquestionable reality of the precedent that causes the existence of the amnesty law." And he emphasizes that what should be analyzed is "whether it is possible to use the exceptional instrument constituted by the amnesty in exchange for obtaining the votes necessary to achieve the investiture of the President of the Government."

"There is no doubt in order to consider the isolated legality of pact 5 that promotes the investiture of Pedro Sánchez but doubts arise when determining the legality of the benefit assumed in correlation with it by the PSOE. It is at this point where it should In my opinion, the debate is focused," he emphasizes.


Thus, it defends that - according to the "civil guidelines" - the amnesty "cannot be arbitrated in exchange for any onerous consideration, since that radically distorts its cause, going, in civil terminology, from gratuitousness to an onerousness that blurs its essential nature as a measure of grace."

"A kidney can be donated free of charge but not in exchange for a price in the same way that it would not be possible to pardon, much less amnesty, in exchange for onerous consideration," he says.

With this, he maintains that "the previous 'political' agreement reached" between the PSOE and Junts that gave rise to the amnesty would not exceed the criteria of validity and legality required by article 1276 of the Civil Code.

As he insists, the amnesty cannot be "a bargaining chip for achieving a parliamentary majority." "We will have to ask ourselves, and I am not able to give an adequate answer, if from a constitutional perspective the extinction of criminal action can be a correlative benefit to obtaining an important political compensation," she points out.


However, he assures that with his blank vote he has "intended, externally, to offer a neutral position." "Well, whether we like it or not, the constitutionality approach undoubtedly has strong political connotations to which we should try to be oblivious. I assume the risks of not making some and others happy with it, especially some," he says.

Although the text of the interim president is not strictly a private vote but an "explanation of vote", CGPJ sources tell Europa Press that it will be sent to the Senate as part of the file that includes the approved report - which warns of that the amnesty law violates the principle of equality and separation of powers-- and the two dissenting votes drafted.

Within the framework of his writing, he takes advantage and insists on "encouraging the essential renewal of the CGPJ."