Unanimity among judges’ associations against partisan use of the Judiciary

The four judges’ associations of the country have come together to ratify the independence of the race and reject the statements of political leaders who use “the existing political debate around the renewal of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) for exclusively partisan purposes.”

The four associations, from the conservative and majority Professional Association of the Magistracy (APM), even the progressive Judges and Judges for Democracy (JJpD), have issued a joint statement after the blockade of the CGPJ returned to focus a good part of the political debate over the weekend.

“The PP has the support of the majority of the judicial career,” he said in an interview with The reason the head of Justice of the PP, Enrique López, by assuring that “the vast majority” asked them to fight for a change in the model of the CGPJ.

“That PP that boasted that it was going to control the second chamber of the Supreme Court today launches a message that the judges are theirs,” he replied the PSOE parliamentary spokesman, Héctor Gómez, which considered López’s words an attack against judicial independence and advanced that they would be taken to the European Commission.

Despite their discrepancies, the judicial associations have decided to respond and make it clear that the judges remain “oblivious to political disputes.”

In this context, they underline that they all agree that it is necessary to reform the system of election of the judicial members of the CGPJ (12 of the 20), so that they are chosen by the judges according to a democratic system that ensures the representation of all the categories and existing sensitivities within the judicial career.

“All judicial associations agree that the temporary state in which the CGPJ is currently, for three years now, constitutes a serious institutional anomaly that must be corrected,” they assure.

As they explain, their discrepancies are related to the convenience of proceeding with the reform of the system of election of the members immediately or later.

“This discrepancy, important as it may be, is completely unrelated to the differences that exist between political formations on this issue,” they underline.

In fact, they add, they have not prevented all associations from following working together in the defense of the common interests of the judicial career and, in particular, for judicial independence.

The four associations, which indicate that they have established mechanisms to strengthen their cooperation, ratify their “commitment to Spanish society in defending the values ​​enshrined in our Constitution” and their decision to stay out of the political dispute.

Unanimity

The statement is signed the APM, the Francisco de Vitoria Judicial Association, Independent Judicial Forum and JJpD, which in recent times had distanced itself from the joint initiatives of the other three associations to demand from the Government an urgent reform of the model for electing the members of the CGPJ.

Enrique López, for his part, accused the PSOE on Monday of making a “vile and tortuous attempt to manipulate” his statements about the judges. As he has pointed out, he did not say that the PP has its majority support, but that there is “a majority support for the demand that the judicial members of the CGPJ be chosen by the judges.”

The national spokesperson for PP, José Luis Martínez-Almeida, has endorsed his explanations, but United We can directly request the resignation of López as counselor for the Presidency, Justice and the Interior of the Community of Madrid.

For the socialist spokesperson in the Madrid Assembly, Hana Jalloul, the counselor’s statements are “shameful” and show what the PP thinks of the judicial institutions.

For now, the bridges for a possible negotiation between the PSOE and the PP seem broken.

This Tuesday, in the plenary session of the Senate, the Minister of Justice, Pilar Llop, will have to explain again to questions from the PP why the Government is betting on the system of parliamentary election of the members of the CGPJ and does not want to leave the appointment of members of judicial extraction in the hands of the judges.

Follow the topics that interest you