Cornejo attacked the reform of the Supreme Court: "Citizens need other things"

“No member of our caucus defends the court per se, but rather the separation of powers“, he added. Many other reflections were saved for later.

► YOU MAY BE INTERESTED: Cornejo appeared again with Bullrich and expressed himself against the elimination of PASO

“If you think there are gangsters on the Court, use constitutional mechanisms to remove them”

Cornejo warned that he would try not to spend the 20 minutes he had responding to the accusations that JxC had received at the venue.

In contrast, he opted for admit that the Argentine Justice needs reformsbut clarifying that in his opinion these reforms they are not the ones proposed by Peronism.

“If the FdT considers that one of the judges is corporate because he has expressed some opinions, I wonder since when is it a crime for Carlos Rozenkrantz to think the way he does. That he does not agree with Peronism cannot be something that inhibits him from being in court, “he retorted.

And he continued: “On the other hand, if they consider that the other three magistrates are gangstersthere are institutional mechanisms: they should propose a impeachment. The solution should not necessarily be to increase the number of members of the court.”

► YOU MAY BE INTERESTED: Daniel Orozco and Facundo Manes met in their “anti-crack” vision and their profession as doctors

Citizens and the functioning of the Supreme Court

Another criticism of Cornejo against the national ruling party had to do with what he defined as “the interests of the ordinary citizen”.

For the former governor, ordinary people are not interested in intrigues around the Supreme Court.

“The best way to empathize with the citizen -Cornejo stressed- is to review what he thinks about the functioning of Justice. Frequently their discontent is not related to the Supreme Court, but to the specific delays in the management“.

The position of the senator is relevant because during his government, Cornejo promoted a series of reforms in the Justice of Mendoza -in fact agreed, together with Anabel Fernández Sagasti (PJ), to advance in the implementation of the jury trials-. That gives you a very particular perspective.

“In Mendoza we do face necessary reforms and today we have processes that are completed in less than 30 days. 50% of the hearings for preventive detention end with abbreviated trials and while in 2016 70% of those deprived of their liberty were prosecuted, today that percentage has been reduced to 30%,” the senator noted.

For Cornejo, these advances had an effect on everyday life. In this regard, he assured that in Mendoza there were until not long ago 9 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants, while now there are 4.

“At the same time, backlogs are being resolved and today civil cases have an average resolution of 5 months“, he exposed.

Alfredo Cornejo and his vision of dialogue

From the perspective of the radical, if those modifications were addressed at the national level would help much more to improve the image of Justice than a change in the number of members of this or that room.

Cornejo summed up: “If what we want is agree on transcendental things, let us understand what our citizens are demanding. The democratic pact of the Argentines today is for order macroeconomically to our country. But to agree on that we need to talk face to face. And the truth is that we do not have the slightest trust between the parties. That’s why the democratic pact should recreate itself in starting to gain trust between us“.

“The citizens of flesh and blood, on foot, demand that we lower inflation, improve investment and increase employment. But those issues are very far from what is being considered in this project“, he finished.

alfredo cornejo supreme court reform.jpg

Cornejo harshly criticized the pro-government project to make the members of the Court go from 5 to 15.

Photo: NA

► YOU MAY BE INTERESTED: Sagasti asked for the reform of the Court and demanded “courage” from Together for Change

The details of the discussion

The debate in the Senate began this Thursday around 3:00 p.m. The axis passed through the bill presented by the national ruling party to expand the number of members of the Supreme Court of Justice and go from the current 5 members to 15.

In fact, the original project presented by the leaders of the caucus of the Front of All -Anabel Fernández Sagasti and José Mayans- underwent modifications, since at first it proposed that the highest national court have 25 members, one for each jurisdiction.

Added to this, on the other hand, is the need for gender parity among those who apply to be part of the Court.

Together for Change had anticipated that it would not give a quorum, but when its members saw that the Front of All had managed to add allies and had the necessary senators to meet, its members went down to the floor.

Anabel Fernández Sagasti senate of the nation.jpg

At first it was not known if the ruling party would achieve a quorum, but it did.  adding some allies.

At first it was not known if the ruling party would achieve a quorum, but it did so by adding some allies.

Actually, the initiative would not remove the current members of the Court -Carlos Rozenkrantz, Ricardo Lorenzetti, Juan Carlos Maqueda and Horacio Rosatti- but it implies that the Upper House should agree and present to other 11 members proposed by the Executive. In this way it would be passed to 15 members.

What’s the point of this? There are several possible readings. On the one hand, if judges were added to the highest court the power that the current members have would be liquefiedwhich in general have been placed on the opposite side of Kirchnerism.

On the other hand, with those 15 members an attempt would be made to “federalize” the Court, that is, to give greater representation to the provinces. Now, if you take into account how many provinces are governed by Peronism and how many by the opposition, you see that most are from the governmentand in Together for Change they swear that they will try to include Peronist representatives with the excuse of this “federalization.”

Another interesting question is about the objective of voting on this project when it is already known that the opposition in the Deputies will resist and, in principle, the ruling party would have no way of achieving approval in the lower house. Is it about place the issue on the public agenda or to make a declaration of principles.

And the entertaining thing is that while all this is happening, the radical ruling party of Mendoza also sent a bill to modify the operation of the Supreme Court of Mendoza.

It is seen that although many people on the street are not passionate about these issues, for politics and management they are fundamental. In the end, it’s like the Italian-French singer Yves Montand once said: “Even if you don’t deal with politics, she will deal with you”.

► YOU MAY BE INTERESTED: Alfredo Cornejo: “There is no explosion like in 2001, because there is also a crack in which everyone leaves”

Leave a Comment