![[Img #74662]](https://thelatestnews.world/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Organisms-with-the-shortest-life-150x150.jpg)
the PP returns to the -judicial- attack against the Government’s assault on the Constitutional Court. The Popular Parliamentary Group has formulated the recusal of the two magistrates chosen by Sánchez, the former Minister of Justice JJuan Carlos Campo and the former high office in Moncloa and in the Generalitat Laura Diezin seven unconstitutionality appeals that the High Court will have to resolve… and that were presented when both still belonged to the Executive.
Specifically, the PP formulates a challenge against Campo and Díez in the unconstitutionality appeals against the Royal Decree-Law of January 19, 2021, for the protection of consumers and users in situations of social and economic vulnerability, understanding the PP that favors squatting; against various provisions of the 2021 Budget Law that reinstated the Wealth Tax; against ‘Celaá law’; and against the Law of the Judiciary of July 1, 2021, which limited the powers of the General Council of the Judiciary while it was in office.
Both are also challenged in the cases on the so-called euthanasia law; on distribution on digital platforms or rider law, against various points of the Royal Decree-Law of May 4, 2021 on the state of alarm for Covid; and against several articles of a decree law and a Catalan law of 2022 on language projects and use of official languages in non-university education.
In the latter, Campo was no longer Minister of Justice, but from the PP they remember that Laura Díez participated in the preparation of opinions on language teaching when he was part of the Council of Statutory Guarantees of Catalonia.
On the other hand, the PP also presents a challenge to Juan Carlos Campo in the amparo appeal presented by the popular in relation to the amendments 61 and 62 on the reform of the organic laws of the TC and the CGPJwhich they wanted to introduce into the regulations on the repeal of sedition and reduction of embezzlement, and with which the PP obtained the very precautionary measures of the Constitutional to stop its processing in the Senate.
“They suffer from partiality”
PP officials consulted with Vozpópuli explain that the challenges are presented “considering that both magistrates appointed in the TC by the Government incur in any of the causes of challenge provided for in section 13 of article 219 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary“.
Thus, among the grounds for recusal included in said regulation is “close friendship or manifest enmity with any of the parties; having held public office, held employment or exercised a profession on the occasion of which has participated directly or indirectly in the matter that is the subject of the lawsuit or cause or in another related to it; or have held a public office, held a job or exercised a profession on the occasion of which they have participated directly or indirectly in the matter that is the subject of the lawsuit or cause or in another related to it”.
The sources consulted highlight that “The same regulations apply to the magistrates of the Constitutional Court as to the rest” and that, in this case, “anyone can appreciate that both suffer from partiality” and, therefore, “they should not decide on appeals against their own Government.”
The appointment, to Europe
The PP charges contacted by this means explain that if Campo and Díez do not admit the revocation, “That car will be presented to the European authorities”. An objective, that of taking these appointments to Brussels, for which the Popular Party has already found the appropriate path: “This matter will have an international tour.”
In the PP they also emphasize that the lack of independence of a court was already key for the European Court of Human Rights will overturn the trial against Arnaldo Otegi in November 2018.
The Strasbourg court then observed “bias” of a court magistrate which condemned the nationalist leader for trying to rebuild the outlawed Batasuna. The body accepted Otegi’s argument against Judge Ángela Murillo, taking into account that only two months before the Supreme Court had accepted the recusal of the judge in another case.
From the PP they point out that, despite the differences between one case and another, “Europe is very sensitive to the lack of impartiality of judges and our own regulations indicate that having held a public position, and having participated directly or indirectly in the matter that is the subject of the lawsuit are sufficient causes for both to be excluded from the appeals presented against their own Government”.
The same sources add that “These are the consequences of appointing former members of the Government” and they highlight the “arrogance of Sánchez and Bolaños “They could have elected others who voted the same, but they took the risk. It’s a show of cockiness that can go wrong.”
