The Supreme asks again for measures to avoid the "collapse" of the Third Chamber

Headquarters of the Supreme Court, in Madrid.

The Supreme Court reactivated this Monday the pulse that it has maintained for months with the Ministry of Justice due to the vacancies suffered by the Third Chamber (of the Contentious-administrative), the one in charge of resolving, among others, the matters that affect the Government.

After the recent retirement of two magistrates, this room has eight of its 33 seats vacant, which, according to the high court, represents "the legal minimum to constitute its five sections", since each of them must have at least five magistrates.

The Government Chamber unanimously agreed this Monday to reiterate to Justice the claim for measures that it made at the end of January to try to “avoid the collapse” of the Contentious Chamber.

More information

The collapse of the Supreme Court urges the renewal of the Judiciary

What happened this Monday, according to the Supreme Court itself, is a reminder to Justice of the lack of response from the department led by Pilar Llop to the claims that the Supreme Court has raised in recent months.

The Government Chamber sent the ministry on January 31 a letter requesting a battery of measures and, a few weeks later, on February 22, the leadership of the high court met with the minister to specify their requests one by one.

But the meeting, as both sides admitted, was not fruitful.

The magistrates left with the feeling that her requests were not going to be heeded, while Llop considered that although there were measures that she had to face because they derived from shortcomings that had been dragging on for years, there were others that were only circumstantial,

In a note released after Monday's meeting of the Government Chamber, the Supreme Court explains that the reason for reiterating the request to the Ministry is that the court wants to know "if there is a positive or negative response to their requests, to study, in the second case, alternative measures to deal with the situation”.

The ministry, for now, has not replied, although the Government's intention is to approve the legislative reform demanded by the Supreme Court and to do so by introducing it as an amendment to another norm whose parliamentary processing is advanced in order to accelerate its implementation.

In the agreement adopted this Monday, the Government Chamber states that, to the eight vacancies that have occurred in the last year, is added "the extraordinary workload" derived from entering the Contentious Chamber, from of last December, of hundreds of cases, both companies and professionals, who demand that the patrimonial responsibility of the State be declared for the application of the measures that were put in place (such as the closure of establishments or the reduction of capacity ) to deal with the covid pandemic.

The State is refusing to compensate the businessmen and they are beginning to challenge these refusals before the high court.