08/04/2020 - 7:40
- Clarín.com
- Politics
With some crosses and marked differences, the judicial reform presented last week by President Alberto Fernández took its first legislative step on Tuesday.
The Minister of Justice and Human Rights, Marcela Losardo, presented before the plenary the committees on Constitutional Affairs and Justice and Criminal Affairs, and answered questions from the representatives of the opposition, who pointed to the cost of the project and criticized that it is debated in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic.
On the side of the ruling party, they defended the initiative and took the opportunity again to question the Mauricio Macri government with issues related to the debt, the cause for alleged illegal espionage and the alleged judicial persecution of former Kirchner officials.
When starting his presentation by videoconference, Losardo argued that the project seeks "a justice service that works, trying to end obstacles and contests between unified jurisdictions and solving conflicts such as delay, the problems of citizens and the State itself."
"This bill took into account all the needs that arose in all areas, thinking of concrete solutions to improve the system of administration of justice," he said.
And he added: "It seeks a comprehensive transformation in federal justice, it has a clear and specific objective: that citizens receive an efficient, effective, close Justice service and that the response to their conflict arrives within a reasonable time."
In this sense, he spoke of a " serious delay and late payment in which are the causes of the 12 federal courts." “The investigations last for excessive periods of up to 25 years. This implies that the elevation of the cases to trial are carried out in a time so distant that it no longer gathers the evidence and ends in the prescription thereof, "he explained.
Regarding the times to deal with the initiative, he said that “it would have been much better to deal with it in February or March, but the pandemic disrupted our times and we had to wait. Today luckily we can be debating and reporting. The moment of Justice is always ”.
In turn, Senator Silvia Elías de Pérez (Together for Change) maintained that this law does not bring “relief or solve what people are needing from Justice, because it will not solve labor, fiscal or commercial issues. , nor security. Yes, it is a project tailored to politics ”.
In addition he compared it with the judicial reform during the menemism. "We are hearing the same arguments as in the 90s, when they took Comodoro Py and went from six to twelve courts. Who did they put? To recognized gentlemen such as Roberto Oyarbide, Carlos Branca and Carlos Liporace, to say one of those who entered to give enormous impunity to the government of that time. Please minister, do not write anything on any napkin, ”he joked.
The Minister of Justice, Marcela Losardo, presented before the plenary the committees on Constitutional Affairs and Justice and Criminal Affairs.
His bench partner Pedro Braillard Poccard stated that "there are a lot of doubts in society as to why this reform, which is quite ambitious, is accelerating so much or is so urgent, all in a context where the public is experiencing great uncertainty" because of the pandemic.
Meanwhile, he asked that the costs of the reform be known. "The best way to avoid miscalculations is to say how much this costs. It is money that comes from the taxpayers pocket, and it is not a minor issue, ”he assured. In the same line, Esteban Bullrich (Together for Change) demanded that the initiative also pass through the Budget Commission.
“We will send them at cost when it is more polished. But I want to clarify that these numbers that are coming out of four billion, five billion, six billion are very far from reality. This is by stage, "replied the minister, specifying that it would be less than 1% of the national budget.
“ Justice is not a cost, it is an investment , it is a pillar. It is like saying that we do not have schools because it is a cost. You have to invest in justice, just as you have to invest in education. This is the time to debate it, "he replied, with some anger.
On the closing, Luis Naidenoff , head of the group of Together for Change, crossed it: “I can agree that justice is an investment, but in Argentina you have to define priorities. With the pandemic, there is an isolated society, businesses go bankrupt, people's despair goes the other way. To have no idea of the costs or where the priorities of the people go is a huge respect f " .
From the ruling party, the senators of the Front of All aimed to refute the main argument of the opposition: the debate on the initiative in the midst of a pandemic.
“It is not a question of opportunity, it is to comply with the pledged word. Our president undertook this reform, and the majority of Argentines are demanding a better Justice, a Justice that is credible again, "defended Martín Doñate.
"It is difficult for me to judge if we can leave Justice for an opportune moment. When is a timely topic? We have to tell someone 'we want a fairer country but endure that we have to get out of this economic process and in five or ten years we are a little more orderly,' ”added Dalmacio Mera.
For his part, Oscar Parrilli mentioned the reform that Macrism tried to carry out in 2017. “When Argentina got into debt, when it destroyed jobs, companies and science and technology, it was not opportune either. Why did the Executive present that? It seems to me more like an excuse than a real reason of state to give an opinion ”, he launched.
Jorge Taiana assured that the initiative is “necessary and timely. First, because this problem cannot be delayed and worsened. And second because it is now precisely that we have to think about the post-pandemic, and for this it is also necessary to face the debates on where we want to put the administration of justice. ”
Regarding the costs of the reform, the head of the All Front caucus, José Mayans , stated that "investment in the Judiciary does not reach 1.5% of the budget, therefore, it is not a problem, there are no excuses. It is essential and necessary that Justice works ".
Senate hearings will continue for the next few weeks. The intention of the ruling party and the opposition is to broaden the debate with the presence of specialists summoned by both parties to reach the signature of the opinion that could be done in the third week of August.
The idea, then, would be that the project reaches the meeting room before September, so that from that month it can be debated in the Chamber of Deputies.