There will be no en bloc resignation of progressive members of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ). The six councilors proposed by the PSOE (Rafael Mozo, Álvaro Cuesta, Clara Martínez de Careaga, Roser Bach, Pilar Sepúlveda and Mar Cabrejas) and the one proposed by the PNV (Enrique Lucas) have ruled out a coordinated resignation on Tuesday to speed up the reshuffling of the judiciary panel , which has been blocked since December 2018 due to the PP’s refusal to reach an agreement with the PSOE. The meeting of these members, held at the headquarters of the CGPJ, was also attended by the member proposed by the IU, Concepción Sáez, which maintains its intention to resign, which it communicated by letter on the 13th, rest to consider the possibility of a chain reaction to pull.
Progressives lifted the meeting this afternoon to discuss whether it would be expedient for the bloc as a whole to follow in Sáez’s footsteps. But before the meeting began, most assumed the answer would be no. “Resignation only gets the conservative sector to celebrate it,” conceded a progressive city councilor in the hours leading up to the appointment.
According to sources consulted by the body, only member Álvaro Cuesta maintained the convenience of a collective resignation during this afternoon’s session. It was he who, on Thursday, hours after Sáez’s resignation was announced, raised the possibility of an immediate resignation to the rest of the group in a bid to provoke some kind of movement from within the CGPJ to the outside that would lead to a renewal of the CGPJ’s body . But after listening to the opinions against his peers, Cuesta has reserved his final decision (whether to stay with the rest of the progressive block or like Sáez going individually) and will share it in the coming days.
Most of the members interviewed said they were open to resigning if it turned out that the move would lead to the collapse of the body and the PP was left with no choice but to accept the renewal to avoid chaos in the judiciary. But they believe his resignation would mean only absolute control of the council by Conservative members for many months, perhaps more than a year, when there is a new government after the next general election.
Currently, the Council consists of 10 Conservative and 8 Progressive members (which will be 7 if Sáez’s announced resignation comes about). Just as the law states that the composition of the plenary session requires a minimum quorum of 10 members plus the president – which would result in paralysis if the 8 progressives resign – the law does not yield a minimum quorum for the standing commission, the highest, before making a decision the plenum. This commission consists of seven members (in its current composition four conservatives and three progressives), so the hypothetical resignation of the directors of the minority bloc would not initially mean that the permanent bloc would be paralyzed, in which they make most of the decisions affecting the day-to-day running of judges, such as permits or licenses.
However, there are many decisions which, once made by the standing body, must be ratified by the plenary and others that fall solely within the competence of that body, such as: B. Adopting the reports on draft laws, approving the budget or resolving the disciplinary proceedings with more severe sanctions. “Something would stand out, but there wouldn’t be chaos or forced renewal,” says one progressive member.
What affects most is what happens closer. Subscribe so you don’t miss anything.
subscribe to
Some directors are uncomfortable because, after Sáez’s resignation, the focus has been shifted to the rest of the members of this group, hoping they can follow the path of IU’s proposed director. “The renewal of the panel is the responsibility of Congress and the Senate. Their Presidents would have to call to promote them,” stresses a member who, like others in his group, accuses his colleague Cuesta of opening the debate without consulting the others. “To do that in public is nonsense. Either you go individually or you call a discreet meeting to discuss it,” admits one counselor. Some were surprised by both the forms and the content: “That the resignation of Sáez, who had already announced his intention on a number of occasions and always had a very unique and different profile within the bloc, provokes this reaction is incomprehensible.” , points to a vowel
At Tuesday’s session, progressive members opposed to the collective resignation did not blame Sáez for his resignation, but did tell him they saw it as a personal decision that they did not question, sources say to the board. The member has decided to leave and this was repeated on Monday to Deputy President, progressive Rafael Mozo, who asked her hours before the full group meeting if she was sure of her resignation. Sáez, who has already vacated his council office and is completing the logistical and bureaucratic procedures to formalize his departure, has responded that he has done so and that there is no going back from his decision.
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits