The federal judge in administrative litigation Enrique Lavié Pico
rejected
this Thursday the proposal of the Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS), close to Kirchnerism, which had as its objective the issuance of a precautionary measure to suspend the application of the entire Decree of Necessity and Urgency (DNU) of economic deregulation of the government of Javier Milei.
This is the first ruling issued by that jurisdiction in which the application of a precautionary measure
against the entire DNU is rejected,
which could be repeated in other general presentations.
So far only the labor chapter is suspended.
Lavié Pico
is the same
fair judge who refused to accumulate the 50 requests for precautionary measures in his court, contrary to the Government's strategy.
The precautionary measure requested by CELS - which until recently was directed by journalist K Horacio Verbitsky - was included in the presentation through which that entity demanded that
DNU 70/23 be declared unconstitutional and absolutely null and void
, considering that affects the observance of the National Constitution.
"The precautionary claim is substantially identical to the main object of the attempted action, so if the requested measure is favorably accepted, the plaintiff would obtain in advance the satisfaction that it seeks with the attempted substantive action, affecting the object of the lawsuit to the detriment of the guarantees constitutional provisions already referred to," said the judge.
In the same resolution, Judge Lavié Pico refused to process it as a collective process.
"The group involved is not clearly defined, due to the generality of the representation invoked by the plaintiff Civil Association and the diffuse nature of the presentation made in the present case," said the magistrate.
Furthermore, "
it is also not properly delimited that the attacked decree
produces equal damage to all the subjects that the plaintiff intends to represent, which rules out the configuration of the necessary precautions for the formal origin of the collective action attempted at the time of identifying to the group involved," he said.
"The plaintiff
has only limited
itself to pointing out that it includes workers, consumers, tenants, subjects of preferential guardianship as well as groups in vulnerable situations; this being evidently of such breadth and generalization that it prevents, in the specific case, its delimitation in a precise and adequate manner with the scope denounced and, consequently, this translates into the impossibility of complying with the requirements demanded by the Court for the configuration of the collective process attempted," he noted.
The judge also recalled that "the questioned regulations" modify laws that regulate very dissimilar matters (Pharmacies, Hydrocarbons, Tourism, Electric Energy, Civil and Commercial Code, Automotive Registry, Labor, Health, Foreign Trade, State Reform, Aeronautical Code , among others, and within them particular aspects).
In that sense, he pointed out "that they would be processed in different judicial areas, so it may, where appropriate, be examined - in the terms of article 99, paragraph 3, of the National Constitution - independently and in relation to each matter before the different courts in their specific jurisdiction, since decisions on its application and/or validity could be different in each case and in each jurisdiction".
At the end of 2023, Cels presented a declaratory action of unconstitutionality and a request for a precautionary measure before the Federal Administrative Litigation jurisdiction against the decree of necessity and urgency (DNU) 70/2023 of the national government, for "altering constitutional rules, violating division of powers and suppress rights".
And he stressed that through this DNU the Executive Branch "decided to alter the constitutional rules of our country, assuming powers that belong to Congress."
DNU CELS JUSTICE