MADRID, 6 Nov. (EUROPA PRESS) -
The Plenary Session of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) approved this Monday an institutional declaration against the amnesty negotiated by the PSOE, Sumar, ERC and Junts to invest Pedro Sánchez as President of the Government, a first statement in which it denounces that, If a law is approved in this sense, it would mean "the abolition" of the rule of law in Spain.
"With this declaration, the General Council of the Judiciary expresses its intense concern and desolation over what the projected amnesty law entails degradation, if not abolition, of the rule of law in Spain, which from the moment it is adopted "It will become a mere formal proclamation that will inevitably have to produce consequences that are detrimental to the real interest of Spain," he warns.
According to sources from the governing body of the judges consulted by Europa Press, the declaration has finally gone ahead with the votes of its 8 promoters - the conservative members Carmen Llombart, José Antonio Ballestero, Francisco Gerardo Martínez-Tristán, Juan Manuel Fernández, Juan Martínez Moya, José María Macías, Nuria Díaz Abad and María Ángeles Carmona-- plus that of their partner Wenceslao Olea, also from the conservative bloc.
Although only 8 votes were needed, they managed to add Olea by modifying the original text. The interim president of the CGPJ, Vicente Guilarte, - also in the conservative orbit - has chosen to vote blank. In his case, he will write an explanation of vote where he will show that he does not agree with the amnesty but that he believes it is convenient to wait until there is a bill so that the CGPJ can make an official statement.
For their part, the 5 progressive members who attended the plenary session voted against. The sixth member of this bloc, Álvaro Cuesta, has not attended the conclave considering that it was "manifestly illegal" because its purpose is contrary "to the legal system and the constitutional functions" of the CGPJ.
Its absence has paved the way for the approval of the institutional declaration, since it has made it possible only with the votes of the 8 promoters. If they had attended, at least 9 would have been necessary.
It is the first time that the CGPJ takes an official position on the future amnesty. And it does so without a detailed text being known yet. In fact, the main criticism of progressive members is that there is not even a bill registered in the Congress of Deputies.
From the progressive wing they emphasize that until now the CPGJ had only spoken with a text registered in Congress. And, in addition, they remember that the Council only has powers to make reports on draft laws and has no control over the initiatives and agreements of the parliamentary groups.