He General Council of the Judiciary, Plus all the associations of judges and prosecutors have shown their absolute repudiation of the lawfare pact by the Socialist Party of Pedro sanchez and the fugitive Carles Puigdemont.
The Permanent Commission of the Council has issued a statement tonight showing its direct rejection of the recognition of lawfare by the judges in our country. “It potentially implies subjecting to parliamentary review decisions framed in the exclusivity of the scope of jurisdiction of our courts that, on the other hand, we understand were produced in a manner fully in accordance with the legality then judged. For all this, the initiative indicated would imply an inadmissible interference in the judicial independence and a flagrant attack on the separation of powers. The continuity of such a parliamentary initiative, if it materializes, would determine our most frontal opposition through the legally established channels,” the members maintain.
Likewise, from the governing body of the judges they express “real and not merely nominal support to all the organs of the Power of attorney on the occasion of future actions that may be carried out within the framework of the legality at all times in force, the ultimate guarantee of the rights and freedoms of all our citizens.”
The four judicial associations, Professional Association of the Judiciary, Francisco de Vitoria Judicial Association, Association of Judges for Democracy y Independent Judicial Forum have signed a joint statement this Thursday where they show their “rejection” of the references to the “lawfare or judicialization of politics” that appears in the agreement signed between the PSOE and Junts.
In the statement, the judges in unison denounce that “the text of the agreement reached contains explicit references to the possibility of developing investigative commissions in parliamentary headquarters in order to determine the presence of situations of judicialization of politics, with the consequences that, in their case could give rise to liability actions or legislative modifications” and add that “this could mean, in practice, subjecting judicial procedures and decisions to parliamentary review with evident interference in judicial independence and bankruptcy of the separation of powers.”