The senator Louis Judge and his peer Humberto Schiavoni appealed the decision of Judge Santiago Carrillo in the framework of the file of the Bar Association where they appeared after the rejection of their protection in the court of Pablo Cayssials against the appointment of Martín Doñate in the Council of the Magistracy.
In the main file, they required that the sentence issued by the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation be ordered to be executed in this file, decreeing the absolute nullity of DPP 33/22 issued by the Presidency of the H. Senate of the Nation (Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner) that “illegally appointed Senator Martín Doñate as a member of the Council of the Nation’s Judiciary, and adopt the pertinent measures so that Senators Luis Juez and Humberto Schiavoni take over as advisers to the titular and alternate judiciary, respectively, both for the second minority and on behalf of the H. Senate of the Nation”.
Given this, the magistrate understood that since they had initiated actions in another court, the rejoinder was inadmissible, which is why now the senators are betting that the Chamber reverse this situation, considering that “said decision is contrary to law and completely lacking of normative foundation, which transforms it into arbitrary, reasons that lead Your Excellency to revoke it”.
So it was that they decided to file an appeal against the decision of May 11 by which the judge decided to reject the request to have them as part of the proceedings and reject the request to order the execution of the sentence issued by the Hon. Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in this file, decreeing the absolute nullity of DPP 33/22 issued by the Presidency of the H. Senate of the Nation that illegally appointed Senator Martín Doñate as a member of the Council of the Magistrature of the Nation.
The senators seek to assume their seat in the Council of the Judiciary, something that was discarded after the K maneuver to divide the block, generating a new second minority and therefore the president of the Senate, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchnerappointed Doñate and Snopek to assume the position and the substitution, respectively.
In this way, they allege that the resolution shows a “notorious orphan of normative foundation, which in itself is sufficient to disqualify it as a valid jurisdictional act. “In this regard, the notorious detachment of Mr. Judge a-quo to the clear normative provisions that oblige him to base any final or interlocutory sentence, under penalty of nullity…It is enough to read the decision-making to notice that completely lacks foundation, of which there is no room but its revocation, ”adds the letter.
Likewise, they refer to the duplicity of causes from which the magistrate infers when rejecting his claim and state that from the sole certification of both files “the different scope of the claim clearly emerges in each one of them, substantially different processes (execution of judgment in one and an appeal for amparo in the other), beyond the fact that they may, eventually, coincide in the intended final result.”
On the other hand, the plaintiffs are offended in the matter of not being taken as a party in the file. “If this were the a-quo argument, this would also be wrong and manifestly contrary to law,” they maintain.
Lastly, they reiterated that if the refusal to accommodate the request was maintained, confirming the decision of the Judge, “it would constitute a notorious violation of the right to defense in court of our right to be appointed counselors of the Council of the Judiciary of the Judiciary.” Nation, since they would have closed -without the possibility of any debate- all the ways to request the jurisdictional protection of our affected right, in flagrant violation of the provisions of art. 18 of our Constitution and art. 8 of the Pact of San José of Costa Rica”.
The magistrate granted the appeal and it will be the Second Chamber of the Administrative and Federal Contentious Chamber that will resolve the issue, which until now has only been negative for the senators. Meanwhile, the Council of the Judiciary continues to function with 18 members, yet to complete the political establishment because both the appointment of deputies and senators were judicialized.