Monday, May 17, 2010


The Spanish Organic Law of the Judiciary (Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial) number 6/1985 provides in its Title II Chapter I, Article 383 (Of the irremovability of judges and magistrates) that "the suspension of the judges and magistrates will take place only ", among other cases, 'where it has been declared to have place to proceed against them for crimes committed in the exercise of their work'.
The same legal text, which governs the spanish judiciary, determines later in the Title IV, Chapter III, article 504 (licenses and permits) that "the judges and magistrates can access licensing of training and permits to be part of international tribunals and other agencies, in agreement with the General Council of the Judiciary'.
The dilemma of the General Council of the judiciary (Consejo General del Poder Judicial in Spanish) that will meet tomorrow in extraordinary session under the chairmanship of judge Carlos Dívar will have to decide between the two articles mentioned above. Grant a special license to the judges Baltasar Garzon Real to put land through in the procedures are still against him and is incorporated with assistant prosecutor Luis Romero-Ocampo in the International Criminal Tribunal or removing judicial career, as is required, after to have opened trial against this week the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court.
Before a matter highly controversial, perhaps the most highly politicized all that has had to discern the body of the Government of judges, by the "services" provided by the holder of Juzgado Central de Instrucción No. 5 of the Spanish Audiencia National to the Government in its negotiations with ETA, the problem that arises is serious.
But the decision that the 20 members of the organ responsible for the government of the third State power, whose main function is to ensure the security of the independence of judges and magistrates compared to the other powers of the State, will determine the democratic health of the spanish Justice and the degree of media and subjection to the executive who chairs Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero.
It is clear that the decision to take to many of the members elected for the CGPJ on the proposal of the PSOE is not easy. Judicial Sources of recognized standing estimated, however, that the Council is not is another exit, has no other solution more worthy than to act as the courts of justice at the time to decide if admitted to processing several causes on the same matter. The criminal matters have always had and take precedence or preference on the other (whether civil, administrative, labor or commercial) by the gravity of the facts to be elucidated.
Otherwise, to grant the purported judge who proclaims without the slightest flushing "advocate for the defense of human rights and the lost causes of the Latin American countries" will be as gran to him a illegal passport to flee to the International Criminal Court and of the circumvention of the action of the action of the Spanish courts, where it has three pending cases in which are involved, in one way or another, each and every one of the 15 members of the Criminal Division of the Supreme Court (who on the other hand have admitted unanimously the three complaints, unusual in the spanish judiciary when the trial is a partner of the judges) would be a burda mockery and flout the own Administration of Justice of the Many of the members of CGPJ part, and the judges responsible for doing so. And, in addition, you may be of, by extension (because the legislature when it drew up the organization of Justice act it was not thinking or by hint that tel Consejo General del Poder Judicial might offend or commit any irregularity, or have a situation as ludicrous as the current) an offense of obstruction of justice offense in article 463.1 of the Criminal Code. Tomorrow, before sitting to deliberate, the members of this judiciary organization , among which is attorney Jose Manuel Gomez Benitez, a friend of Garzon and 'negotiator' with ETA, should look. The text says:
(Of the obstrrucción to Justice) which cited in legal form, left voluntarily to appear, without just cause, before a court in criminal proceedings with reo, causing suspension of the trial, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to six months or a fine of six to 24 months (...) If the representative of close offense was lawyer, the attorney or representative of the Prosecution in performance, would be imposed the sentence in the upper half"

If the lawyers, attorneys and prosecutors can be convicted of obstruction of justice to a greater extent what would be the members of the organ of Government of the judges if failed to fulfill their duty. Therefore, this article of the Criminal Code, could be applied by extension to the subject debate tomorrow and at least journalistically argued that an abdication of functions by the CGPJ could be interpreted as a crime of obstruction of justice, specifically, to the work of the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, which have an obligation to assistant. That is why, thinking Carlos Dívar member of the Opus Dei rather than anyone, today i dismissal with a good evening and that God shared fate.

No comments:

Post a Comment