The Judiciary rejects the Government's plan to renew the Constitutional Court

The president of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), Carlos Lesmes, has propitiated with his vote that the body approve this Monday the response of the most conservative sector to the express legal reform proposed by the PSOE to unlock the renewal of the Constitutional Court.

Lesmes' vote has been the only one that has been added to that of the nine members who had submitted a brief against the socialist proposal and forced the convening of an extraordinary plenary session to debate the position of the CGPJ before the vote on the reform in Congress scheduled for Thursday.

The seven members proposed by the PSOE have voted against, while one of the directors proposed by the PP (Vicente Guilarte) and the one supported by the PNV (Enrique Lucas) have voted blank.

The plenary session of the Council measured this Monday how far to take its last clash with the Government.

And the result is that the initiative of nine conservative members has gone ahead, although with a less forceful tenor than they wanted.

The proposal that was on the table was to flatly reject the legal reform promoted by the PSOE to replace the four magistrates of the Constitutional Court whose mandate expired on June 12.

But the document that the nine conservative members presented needed one more vote to guarantee its approval and, with the original wording, it was not going to get it.

They were negotiating until the last minute to try to gather support, but finally they only got that from Lesmes.

For this, according to sources of the organ,

This point also caused a certain division among the members themselves who signed the text, since it meant institutionally involving the governing body of the judges before the European Commission and some councilors were not in favor.

Nor Lesmes, so, finally, the most belligerent sector with the Government, which defended going to the EU, has agreed to leave it out.

According to sources in this sector, the matter has been addressed during a meal held before the plenary session, which has been attended by conservative members to finish outlining a new alternative document to the one initially presented.

In that meeting,

Most of the councilors agreed that taking the matter to the EU was not a priority and could even be "counterproductive" because the European Commission will publish its report on the rule of law in Spain in the coming days.

“Insisting with the commission on what it already knows was not practical and perhaps not even appropriate,” explains a member of the body.

Finally, the proposal has been withdrawn and has not been debated in plenary.

The final text approved by the Council only proposes to request the Congress of Deputies to obtain the report of the governing body of the judges on the bill presented by the PSOE.

The CGPJ always informs about the government's bills when they are processed in an ordinary way, but in this case the PSOE intends to do it by way of urgency, which shortens the procedures and excludes the opinion of the Council.

The body, however, defends that the European Commission has been in favor of the legal modifications that affect the Judiciary being consulted with all the affected sectors.

The members also ask Congress to request a report from the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission).

In favor of these petitions, 10 of the 19 members of the plenary have voted:

the president and nine members proposed by the PP: José Antonio Ballestero, Ángeles Carmona, Nuria Díaz, Juan Manuel Fernández, Carmen Llombart, José María Macías, Juan Martínez Moya, Gerardo Martínez Tristán and Wenceslao Olea.

They have voted against Roser Bach, Mar Cabrejas, Álvaro Cuesta, Clara Martínez de Careaga, Rafael Mozo, Pilar Sepúlveda (all proposed by the PSOE) and Concepción Sáez (IU).

The socialist proposal, which plans to return to the acting Council (its mandate has expired since December 2018) the powers to appoint Constitutional magistrates is, according to the majority of the body, "contradictory and incoherent."

What the PP councilors demand is that the Courts correct last year's reform, but not in the sense of only returning the power to elect the magistrates of the court of guarantees, but all the discretionary positions that are vacant in the Supreme , the National Court, the superior courts of justice and the provincial courts.

The body has also decided to send to Congress and the Senate the agreement adopted on June 27 by the Governing Chamber of the Supreme Court.

In that text, the leadership of the high court asked the Council to inform both Houses of its "deep concern" because the lack of renewal of the Council and the legal impossibility of making discretionary appointments are creating a situation that, if it continues, will be "unsustainable." ”.

This second agreement has been adopted with the vote in favor of fifteen of the 19 members of the plenary (Martínez de Careaga, Mozo, Sáez and Sepúlveda have opposed).