Judges and prosecutors intensify their pulse to the government for judicial reforms. At the concentration convened this Saturday before the Supreme Court, where many are expected to be dressed in the togas that have the obligation to dress during the procedural events, three consecutive days of strike will follow as of July 1. The call part of the five associations of the Judicial Rate, which see a threat to the “basic principles of the rule of law” in the projects with which the Executive intends to modify access to the career and the statute of the Prosecutor's Office.
The promoters – among those who are not the only two progressive associations – have chosen to maintain the strike despite the fact that the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) decided this week unanimously that the exercise of this right by the judges lacks legal “support”. The body did not “announce” the call and rejected to establish minimum services, which will be determined by the strike committee. However, the CGPJ has already reported that there will be no sanctions for the strikers. The Ministry of Justice does plan to discount their salary, which has not happened in four of the five mobilizations that have taken place during democracy.
In the center of the controversy is the Executive's plan to regularize a thousand substitute judges and prosecutors that cover low and carry out courts in precarious situations. The project provides for an open process and is not limited to those who have performed these functions within the judicial and fiscal careers, although it is thought of “especially” for those who have been in this situation for years. Applicants must prove five years of legal professional practice to be able to present themselves to a practical opinion to which a phase of merits will follow. Justice ensures that stabilization is bound by the European Commission.
According to associations, this process “does not ensure the rigorous accreditation of the legal knowledge necessary to exercise jurisdictional or fiscal functions.” And grants direct access to the category of judge or prosecutor, after the practices, without equating in demand to the ordinary process of the free shift, which requires a preparation greater than five years on average. The Executive defends, however, that a contest-opposition will be held according to the criteria of “equality, merit and capacity set by the Constitutional Court.”
In fact, the law has allowed access to the career for the contest of merits to professionals with more than ten years of experience, without passing an opposition. It is the so -called fourth shift that the Executive also wants to strengthen. The law provides that they must suppose 25% of the race, but at present only 9.33% of the magistrates have accessed the race in this way. What the reform does is to ensure that its calls must be “annual and simultaneous” with those of the free opposition, where the forecast is to convene 1,440 places in the next three years.
Consulted judges and prosecutors recognize that the fear that the stabilization of the substitutes will harm their particular interests when occupying certain destinations has made the mobilization light especially among the youngest professionals, those who have just premiered in the race or a few years ago that approved the opposition. In fact, members of these last promotions promoted a WhatsApp group that already brings together more than a thousand professionals from different generations and where the strike was called that was finally welcomed by the associations.
That group has disseminated a manifesto plagued with misrepresents. It is stated, for example, that the government “will control the preparation of the opposition” for its proposal so that the applicants have the possibility of going to a public center. It also appears that the reforms imply that the races “will become politicized in base”, without offering arguments that support an accusation of that draft.
Written opinion
Other of the most criticized elements are the inclusion of a test written in the opposition that gives access to the race. Convening associations defend that the opinion “is a turn of 30 years and an increase in subjectivity in the evaluation of judges and prosecutors.”
“The practical examination was removed at the time with the argument that it allowed to choose a certain profile of candidates. In addition, the practical part already exists in the Judicial School. The reform reduces the level of demand,” says Judge Alejandro González Mariscal de Gante, spokesman for the conservative and majority professional association of the magistracy (APM), which Secund the strike next to the Francisco de Vitoria Judicial Association (AJFV) and Independent Judicial Forum (FJI), which group 47% of the judicial career, the Association of Prosecutors (AF) and the Professional Professional Association of Prosecutors (APIF).
Executive sources reiterate that memorial tests – a test type exam and an oral test – are not eliminated. And that what is done is to introduce a practical case that allows to evaluate other skills necessary for the exercise of jurisdiction, such as the capacity for drafting, legal argumentation or the application of the right to specific cases. They also remember that other bodies such as notaries, registrars or state lawyers must also pass exams written in their oppositions. These exams will be anonymized and oral tests will be recorded, which does not happen now.
The associations, however, require the withdrawal of a reform that has already passed the first process of its parliamentary path with its taking into consideration in the Plenary of Congress, where it will be processed by the urgency procedure. And that includes other measures such as the Scholarship System by law in a context in which 98.71% of the judges of the last promotion had the financial support of their parents during the preparation of the opposition, According to CGPJ data. 64.52 % of the total had not worked before.
The associations also ask for the withdrawal of the reform of the Statute of the Prosecutor's Office “for assuming a serious decline in the autonomy of the Fiscal Ministry.” They argue that there is even steps back, by “unreasonably increasing” the power of the State Attorney General “without establishing internal counterweights or true guarantees for prosecutors to carry out their investigative work.” The reform establishes that the mandate of the State Attorney General will be five years and will no longer coincide with that of the Government and reduce the functions of the Fiscal Council, an advisory body of the Public Ministry in which the majority of its members are elected by their peers, among other measures.
Judges and prosecutors have already starred in an essay of their protests on June 11, when ten minutes stops were held before the courts of courts and courts. Some came dresses with togas and, in certain locations, citizens who supported them uttered insults against the president of the Government, Pedro Sánchez. The concentration of this Saturday before the Supreme is also open to “citizens truly committed to the defense of independent justice and the service of general interest.” But its promoters insist that “any assignment or partisan claim” should be left out.