The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Coronavirus in Argentina: unanimously, the Supreme Court rejected Cristina Kirchner's request

2020-04-25T00:52:24.837Z


The highest court considered that it is the Senate that "must determine for itself if it can hold a virtual session." The vice president wanted to approve the wealth tax.


04/24/2020 - 16:57

  • Clarín.com
  • Politics

The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (CSJ) rejected this Friday the request made by Vice President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner to issue on the possibility that the Congress of the Nation resume sessions virtually during the quarantine by the coronavirus.

As confirmed by judicial sources, the decision was made unanimously by Clarín : Four of the Court's judges "were inclined because the court's intervention did not correspond due to the absence of a case or controversy", while the rest dismissed it "in limine", that is, without submitting it for consideration. 

The sources consulted revealed that the president of the CSJ Carlos Rosenkrantz, the vice president Elena Highton de Nolasco and the ministers Juan Maqueda, Ricardo Lorenzetti and Horacio Rosatti, considered that the highest court "was not empowered to intervene in this type of claim."

" The Senate, not the Court, must determine for itself whether it can hold a virtual session ," the ruling maintains. 

In its ruling, the Court noted that Cristina Kirchner's lawyers generically mention the National State as defendant but do not explain why. And they added that this is curious given that the National State (neither President Alberto Fernández nor any other official) engaged in any conduct, either current or foreseeable, that prevents the Senate from sitting remotely.

The highest court also understood that the vice president's proposal should not be issued due to the absence of a lower court ruling. 

They rejected another of Cristina Kirchner's arguments, who warned of the need to prevent maneuvers that protect "economic groups".

The magistrates considered that this accusation was made without specifying what the maneuvers would be, who would carry them out, or what economic groups would be involved.

And they considered, as the sources consulted explained, that "even more important is that they are not sued when they should have been, if it were true that said groups intend to intercede in the way of the functioning of the Senate of the Nation."

Furthermore, they considered that the doctrine of "institutional gravity" cannot be appealed because it does not enable the Court to "encroach on competencies that do not belong to it."

Minister Carlos Rosenkrantz was the only one who decided not to make explicit the reasons for his rejection.

That was the response of the Court to the proposal that the President of the Chamber of Senators raised on April 14, before the growing controversy over the suspension of the sessions.

Cristina Kirchner requested that the highest court grant "certainty of constitutionality" to the possibility of reactivating the treatment of bills through videoconferences to avoid face-to-face sessions in the framework of the social isolation that is promoted against the coronavirus.

Specifically, the letter that the vice president sent through the director of Legal Affairs of the upper house, Graciana Peñafort, indicated that the Court should issue itself regarding the validity of virtual sessions to deal with those matters that cannot be regulated by Decree of Need and Urgency (DNU) signed by the Executive Power, such as tax, criminal or electoral matters.

The request was formalized just after the Front of All began to draft a bill to establish a one-time tax on great wealth, the text of which is prepared by deputy Carlos Heller at the request of the head of the bloc Máximo Kirchner. With the endorsement of President Fernández, that canon would be applied to assets over 3 million dollars. 

Cristina Kirchner decided to resort to the Court because the regulations of both legislative Houses prohibit non-face-to-face sessions in the parliamentary precinct, so any vote using virtual means would run the risk of being declared invalid. 

In her presentation, the Vice President referred to "the pressing need to legislate in tax matters due to the economic consequences" that the pandemic has on the world in general and on Argentina in particular.

"In these circumstances, the need for the Congress of the Nation to meet is, by all accounts, urgent," said Cristina Kirchner in the letter.

Three days after the formal presentation, Peñafort came out to question the Court's decision to suspend a virtual meeting that he had planned and denounced that this was to "hinder" the treatment of the tax on large fortunes.

However, that same day, the highest court of Justice authorized the extraordinary judicial fair to analyze the constitutionality request on a possible remote session of the Senate.

The issue grew in size over the days due to the demands of the ruling party to guarantee the mechanisms to be able to hold a session and because the acting attorney general, Eduardo Casal, rejected the request of the vice president, considering that it was not "original competence" of the Supreme Court of Justice to issue in this regard. 

Casal understood that the Senate of the Nation is not included in the original jurisdiction of the Court and that there are "no legal circumstances", such as the appeal, which enable the highest court to understand in a file, so therefore not it is up to the ministers of the Court to rule.

Casal's interpretation was harshly rejected by Peñafort, who resorted to a controversial phrase to defend Cristina Kirchner's request: “The Court, who has to decide whether Argentines are going to write the story with blood or reasons, because we are going to write it same".

For these words, deputies from Together for Change denounced Peñafort, considering that he threatened the Supreme Court. 

Beyond the intersections, efforts were made in the National Congress for the Chamber of Deputies to resume its activity next Monday, while awaiting the Court's definition of what will happen in the Senate. 

The president of the lower house, Sergio Massa, called for next Monday a meeting of Parliamentary Labor at the headquarters of the Legislative Palace to agree on the agenda of issues to be addressed in the next session, although it is not yet defined whether the plenary will It will be done in person or virtual.

In the Senate, meanwhile, the accusations between the ruling party and the opposition continued regarding the mechanism to meet during the isolation stage due to the coronavirus pandemic, while they wait for the Supreme Court to rule on the request of the vice president and head of that body, Cristina Fernández, of certification of validity of the virtual debates.

But in the midst of the discussion, the interblocks of Together for the Change of Senators and Deputies demanded the constitution of face-to-face meetings of the Legislative Power to precisely modify the processes of sanctioning the laws.

"Any modification in the operating modalities must follow the steps established by current regulations, otherwise we would not only be increasing the risk of subsequent litigation, but laying a dangerous antecedent," they said.

What is Coronavirus? How is it spread and what are its symptoms?

Watch the special

Source: clarin

All news articles on 2020-04-25

You may like

News/Politics 2024-03-06T00:05:31.306Z
News/Politics 2024-03-17T23:46:08.841Z

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.