The plenary session of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) meets again this Tuesday, at the request of the Conservative members, to vote on the candidatures for the renewal of the Constitutional Court. There is no prior agreement that makes it likely that no candidate will get the 11 required votes, as the members proposed by the PP continue to veto the progressive candidate José Manuel Bandrés and push for a name other than this bloc at all costs want candidate: This time to the former President of the Fourth Chamber of the Supreme Court, María Luisa Segoviano, who retired two months ago. The Conservatives are looking for a member of the other sector to vote for them and their eyes are on Enrique Lucas, proposed by the PNV and abstaining in the previous vote because his brother Pablo Lucas was one of the candidates was. He did not back Bandrés’ candidacy for the progressive sector in his time and the Conservatives are now looking for him to support Segoviano.
Government intervention to break the deadlock on the CGPJ’s renewal of the constitution through legislative reform has deepened divisions among blocs of the governing body of judges. After three months of failed negotiations, the possibility of the executive registering a bill to implement its proposal – which would allow the nominee with the most votes from each faction to be appointed without the other sector having to support him – has changed strategy , particularly by the Conservatives who, after betting on postponing the appointments and not proposing a candidate, now attempted to carry out the renewal before proposing three different judges for the position. What has not changed is the priority of the councilors proposed by the PP: stopping the appointment of Bandrés, the Progressives’ official candidate, whom the other faction rejects because they consider him the government’s favourite.
The Conservatives tried last week to split the progressive bloc by nominating Conservative César Tolosa and Pablo Lucas, Bandrés’ partner in the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court, as candidates and for whom some members of the Progressive faction bet for the Constitutional Party. But this sector, which opted for Bandrés after an internal vote by six votes to one, respected that decision en bloc in the last plenary session, thwarting the break sought by the Conservatives, who have 10 votes and only need one to pass the to reach necessary 11 (three fifths of the 18 members remaining in a plenary session whose mandate has expired four years ago).
More information
The councilors proposed by the PP are now trying again by putting the Segoviano name on the table. This time, in principle, eight votes from the progressive sector will be at stake because, unless his brother is proposed by an adviser at the last moment, member Lucas no longer has to abstain, according to the interpretation of the majority members of the consulted body. And the voice of this adviser, elected nine years ago on the PNV’s nomination, is what the Conservatives are looking for, say several members.
Lucas did not sign Bandrés’ candidacy, that the six members proposed by the PSOE and the member proposed by the IU have registered for Tuesday’s session, which has raised suspicions among the members of the plenary session. “We haven’t negotiated with him, but if he wants to support us, we’re happy,” says a conservative. The adviser proposed by the PNV has usually voted with the progressives, but has always remained somewhat on the fringes of the group’s strategy. “The progressive group is seven plus Lucas. They usually voted with us, but not always. He’s not unwaveringly part of the progressive faction,” says one councilman.
What affects most is what happens closer. Subscribe so you don’t miss anything.
Subscribe to
The progressive members, who have taken the negotiations more directly, are trying to unblock the renewal of the constitution but downplay the fact that their name is not among the signatories. “Out of respect, we didn’t offer him to sign our candidacy. In order not to force him into the obligation of having to sign it when his brother seems frustrated,” says a member, who also warns that Pablo Lucas’ candidacy is not yet ruled out, since aspirants will be presented to them by the start of the plenary session “Nothing prevents a conservative among those who voted for Lucas in the previous plenary session from putting his name on the table again,” says this adviser.
In this case, Lucas would have to do without again. But if his brother does not run as a candidate this time, as expected by the majority, the abstention debate could also be taken up again in plenary, according to several members. “When we debated the voting rules at the beginning of the negotiations, some members pointed out that his brother would have to withdraw from the entire process if he finally ran,” recalls an adviser.
If Lucas decided to vote now with the Conservatives, he would favor the election of the two candidates proposed by this group (Tolosa and Segoviano), which would imply the immediate renewal of the Guarantee Court and would likely cause the legislative reform pushed by the government to be rejected and caused the first precautionary suspension of a legislative procedure before the Constitutional Court. If the appointments are approved in the CGPJ, it would be the first time in its history that it would be done without a consensus between the blocs and with the two candidates proposed by the same sector.
Several members agree that the Conservatives’ decision to abandon Lucas’s candidacy and change it to that of Sevillano has not gone down well with the member proposed by the PNV, which could also have unforeseeable consequences. But his anger would be with the Conservatives either way, making members of both groups doubt he will choose to back them in the crucial vote. He also didn’t like this change of candidate in the progressive group, which accuses its conservatives in the plenum of acting “frivolously” and appointing judges and then dismissing them.
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits