Five members of the Judiciary believe that the body "exceeds limits" in its report against the housing law

Five progressive members of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) have registered this Friday a particular vote against the report opposed to the housing law approved by the plenary session.

According to these members (Álvaro Cuesta, Clara Martínez de Careaga, Rafael Mozo, Pilar Sepúlveda —proposed by the PSOE— and Concepción Sáez —by IU—), the text agreed by the majority supposes an "excess" in the functions of the governing body of the judges and “distorts” the content of the bill.

In their vote, which will be sent to the Government together with the report approved by the plenary session, they defend that the norm prepared by the Executive constitutes "an adequate normative instrument for the consecration" of the right to housing.

The particular vote registered this Friday is signed by five of the six progressive members who rejected in plenary this Thursday the report contrary to the housing law written by José Antonio Ballestero (proposed by the PP) and Enrique Lucas (by the PNV) .

Of the members who voted against that text, only the progressive Mar Cabrejas has chosen to stay out of the particular vote, which incorporates almost the entire content of the report on the draft law drafted by Álvaro Cuesta that was shot down by the plenary session on the day 14.

More information

The new report from the Judiciary warns the Government that the housing law "expropriates" powers from the autonomies

But in addition to reiterating the arguments already defended in the previous report, the members subscribe to a critical doubt about the text approved by the plenary session, which, they say, supposes "a distortion and incorrect version of the content and assessment" of the bill.

The five members who sign the vote defend that the right to housing in article 47 of the Constitution is "more than a programmatic declaration", despite the fact that the report approved by the Judiciary "restricts it to the point of turning it into a mere rhetorical principle ”.

“In no case does the draft disregard or deny the tenor of article 148.1.3a, which establishes that the autonomous communities may assume competences in land planning, urban planning and housing, that they have, therefore, competence in housing and that they come practicing”, affirm the five members.

But this, they add, "does not leave them shielded from the State, which also has its obligations in relation to article 47 of the Constitution."

“There is no constitutional shield for the autonomous communities in terms of housing, capable of preventing the recognition of the powers of the State on the basic conditions that guarantee the equality of all Spaniards in the exercise of their constitutional rights and on the general coordination of the economic planning of the so-called housing subsector”, maintains the individual vote, which resembles this case to the regulation of the national dependency system launched by the State in a matter whose competence is transferred to the autonomous communities.

The individual vote is also very critical of some of the considerations included in the report approved by the plenary session of the CGPJ which, in his opinion, incur in "an excess" of the traditional content of the Council's reports on draft laws and of what it must be the informative function included in article 561 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary (LOPJ).

“We consider that the majority of the plenary of the CGPJ in its report, as if it were a third legislative Chamber, makes a forced and unconstructive interference in aspects of the articles of the text submitted for its consideration, with a priori and judgments of intentions that are exaggeratedly critical and improper. of the reporting institutional function, addressing a set of questions and normative statements of the draft, of absolute availability to the legislator, as occurs, for example, when the report delves into the regulation that the Leasing Registry makes the draft, defending as an alternative option the Property Registry, delving into political or economic considerations that do not correspond to it”.

These members disagree with the interpretation assumed by the majority of the plenary, which considers that the law prepared by the Government supposes "a clear limitation" of the regional powers in housing matters. For the progressives who sign the vote, the bill seeks "coherent and coordinated regulation" of the most essential aspects of housing policies. “The mandate directed to the public powers of article 47 of the Constitution, which twice uses the qualification of 'Right', when it refers to the Right to decent and adequate housing (...) and will establish the pertinent norms to make effective this Law (...), it is a mandate that is also addressed to the State. This article sets a common objective for the different powers of the State”, they warn.

The report approved by the plenary session of the CGPJ has received another private vote, in this case concurrent, signed by members Juan Manuel Fernández and Juan Martínez Moya.

Both, proposed by the PP, voted in favor of the majority text, but they wanted to put in writing that in that report they miss a mention of the work that the CGPJ has carried out in terms of housing, through agreements with other institutions and implementation of social measures related to evictions and foreclosures

Read the report of the Judiciary, which five members believe is an "overreach"