The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

The Supreme Court gives free rein to the oppositions of the National Police after suspending them for almost a week

2022-12-05T19:21:15.305Z


The court considers corrected the errors that prevented applicants with intraocular lenses from applying. The police have already received more than 25,437 applications for the 2,456 places reconvened


The Supreme Court has given free rein to the oppositions to cover 2,456 National Police positions five days after suspending them, once the call has been corrected to make it clear that those who wear intraocular bodies or phakic lenses can aspire to be a police officer to improve his vision.

The high court has annulled its order of November 29, by which it declared void the call for the public contest to access the National Police School of Ávila, launched on November 15, for which 25,437 instances had already been presented.

The Supreme Court details that it has revoked its own decision in a matter of days after receiving a letter from the State Attorney on December 2 in which it begged to be allowed to go ahead with the process.

This had been canceled because in the catalog of exclusions it included as such the “loss or atrophy of an eyeball.

Intraocular foreign bodies.

Any type of intraocular surgery”, as it appears in the text published in the Official State Gazette on November 18.

According to the Chamber, it was decided to suspend the oppositions after waiting in vain for the State Attorney's Office to explain what was being done to eliminate the questioned exclusion, which had been cautiously suspended since September 2021.

More information

The Supreme Court annuls the recently convened oppositions to the National Police

Thus, "one week later (...) given that the State's lawyer had not made any argument" within the established period, the court chaired by Pablo Lucas Murillo de la Cueva concluded that the summons violated the rights of those they would like to be policemen and wear intraocular lenses.

So it suspended the oppositions on November 29 and notified the parties the next day.

The court itself details that, precisely on the same day that it had reported the suspension, it received the allegations, but that these were so vague, generic and insufficient that it maintained the suspension.

Already on December 1 the knot was undone.

“On December 1, 2022 at 1:14 p.m., the State Attorney submitted a document dated the previous day in which he stated that the BOE of November 30, 2022 had published a correction of errors in the resolution of the General Directorate of the Police on November 25, 2022. From this the State Attorney inferred that the defect denounced by the appellants had been remedied”, writes the room.

⚠️Attention opponents⚠️


The call for access to the Basic Scale continues ➡️The order of the TS of 29N has been revoked



There are already more than 25400 instances presented



The resolution of the DGP of 15N must be interpreted with the corrections introduced in the BOE of the day 30⤵️ https://t.co/KoChrZqXrX

– National Police (@policia) December 5, 2022

Indeed, the General Directorate of the Police modified the bases of the call and published them in the BOE to make it clear that the points on intraocular strangers or phakic lenses as causes of exclusion “do not apply”.

In that text, the police admit that there was "an inadvertent error" in maintaining the cause of rejection.

In this way, the Supreme Court gives free rein to the oppositions, "confirming that the resolution of the General Directorate of the Police of November 15, 2022 (BOE of November 18, 2022) must be interpreted and applied in accordance with the corrections introduced in the BOE of November 30, 2022.

In addition, according to the order notified today, it does not impose costs on any of the parties.

Source: elparis

All news articles on 2022-12-05

You may like

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.