Congress debates whether to force the Constitutional Court to explain the admission or inadmissibility of amparo appeals

MADRID, 27 Nov. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The plenary session of Congress will debate this Tuesday a reform promoted by the deputy of Foro Asturias, Isidro Martínez Oblanca, who seeks to force the Constitutional Court to argue and publish its orders for the admission or inadmissibility of appeals for amparo, since he considers that it is not enough to hide in the work overload of the guarantee court.

In the initiative, collected by Europa Press, the Asturian deputy dismisses as "inadmissible" that "an extra-legal or practical issue, such as the workload of the Court, prevails over constitutional principles such as the motivation of judicial decisions."

As he explains, the Constitutional Court presents a high rate of inadmissibility of amparo appeals, above 97%, but "the most worrying thing" is that the appellant cannot know the procedural or substantive reasons for which his appeal has been inadmissible. .

"There must be a feasible and useful method that allows the appellant to know the legal reasons for the decision, especially when it comes to an extraordinary appeal against violations of the rights and freedoms of the Constitution," he says.

His proposal is to change the TC law to force the court to argue its decision and thus "establish objective and explicit criteria", which would also be public by imposing the dissemination of those orders.

In his opinion, this change will not be able to alleviate the high rate of inadmissibility of appeals for amparo, but at least it will allow citizens and the legal operators that advise them to know in a more concrete and detailed way the elements that allow them to discern the existence of " special constitutional relevance", and thus be able to recommend not to file an appeal, when the circumstances do not exist to be able to undertake it successfully.

"This, without a doubt, will contribute to the prestige of our constitutional Justice and discard the perception that is being imposed in legal practice, configuring the achievement of the admission of an appeal for protection as a true chimera", points out Martínez Oblanca.