The Supreme Court has notified this Friday the two sentences annulling the appointment of Edward Stephen as Juvenile Court Prosecutor. Stephen, a member of the Progressive Union of Prosecutorswas proposed for the position up to two times by the former State Attorney General, Dolores Delgado. It was one of the most controversial appointments made by the former Minister of Justice since the other candidate for the position, the prosecutor of Sala Jose Miguel de la Rosa He was one of the greatest specialists in matters of Minors in Spain.
The High Court annulled in April 2022 the appointment of Esteban as prosecutor of the Juvenile Chamber alleging lack of motivation. Even so, Delgado reappointed Eduardo Esteban to the position despite the fact that the Supreme Court stressed that the resumes between the two candidates for the position – Esteban and De la Rosa – were not comparable.
The Contentious-Administrative Chamber, in the new judgments known today, underlines that “the question raised here is not whether the State Attorney General has adequately motivated that Mr. Esteban Rincón can be promoted to the category of Chamber Prosecutor, nor even if he would deserve it more than Mr. De la Rosa Cortina if the latter were not already. prefer a candidate without any theoretical or practical experience in the matter over another who has proven to be a true specialist in the same; and if this, in addition, can reasonably be motivated on the basis of arguments that explicitly avoid giving weight and relevance to the specific preparation in Juvenile Law, pointing out that what is truly decisive are other considerations (experience in the leadership, practice of Constitutional Law, harmony with the criminal policy orientation of the State Attorney General, etc.)”.
The judges have a clear answer: no. “When it comes to deciding who is most suitable to fill a position that has a well-identified profile, it is not possible to underestimate, if not ignore, the merits specifically related to said profile”, read the resolutions presented by the magistrate Luis Diez-Picazo.
The High Court responds to Delgado that “putting all the emphasis on other considerations” to justify the appointment of Edward Stephen “It is not addressable because it eludes the core of the issue.” “That he used twenty-two pages does not alter this conclusion,” added the magistrates.