The words of the President of the Government, Pedro Sánchez, in which he assured that “”, pronounced this Monday night in an interview on TVE, have been received with rejection by most judicial associations. Part of the judicial group, accustomed in recent months that various political leaders publicly question their decisions, believes that these new demonstrations, in the mouth of the president of the Executive and in reference to the cases of alleged corruption that affect their relatives, cross a new line, so they claim “respect for judicial independence” and warn that these statements generate distrust and damage democracy.
The progressive judges and judges for democracy (JJPD), is the only one that, despite ensuring that “perhaps it does not correspond to the president of the Government to carry out these demonstrations”, has branded “undoubtedly” “the instrumentalization of certain judicial procedures for clearly partisan reasons.” “The association has long denounced the judicialization of politics and that is why we ask that the courts act with the maximum rigor to avoid it,” said its spokesman, Edmundo Rodríguez Achútegui.
María Jesús del Barco, president of the Professional Association of the Magistracy (APM), majority and conservative tendency, has regretted that the president does not know something “basic” in a rule of law: “Pedro Sánchez does not know respect for the judiciary,” he said in statements to Efe. Del Barco recalled that the criticisms of the Judicial Power of Sánchez “have been evident for a long time” and that “he is governing with the vows of Junts fruit of a pact in which he talks about lawfare (Judicial persecution for political purposes) “.
The spokesman of this same group, Alejandro González Mariscal de Gante, has differentiated between the “lawful discrepancy” in matters in which the judges resolve in sentence conflicting issues and a part is not satisfied, of “attributing political intentionality to the judge.” “That speech erodes citizen trust in the impartiality of justice. Without trust, institutions lose credibility and democratic quality suffers. It is essential that even in discrepancy, we preserve respect for judicial independence.”
In the Francisco de Vitoria association, the second with more affiliates and moderate trend, have considered “unacceptable” generic criticism to the judiciary, because “they generate social distrust and damage our democracy.” “They are especially serious when they come from the president of the Government, who must be demanded greater prudence and respect for justice. The judges in Spain comply with the law and work professionalism,” said his spokesman, Judge Sergio Oliva, in a video distributed in social networks. “The rule of law demands respect for judicial independence and confidence among institutions. If someone believes that a judge acts badly, there are legal causes,” added Oliva.
Compared to Trump
“He could have taken advantage of the question they asked him to express his absolute confidence in the Judiciary, thus, without more. And if he wanted, at the same time, to support the innocence of the people around his surroundings who are being investigated,” said magistrate Fernando Portillo, spokesman for Independent Judicial Forum (FJI).
This “quite serious” and “irresponsible” association the president’s demonstrations, and affect that the fact that they start from the head of government on a public television involves “an important qualitative leap”. “We know that the president of the Government, when he speaks of judges who make politics, tells us that he is referring to those who are accidentally investigating the corruption cases of his most immediate environment. Therefore, these demonstrations, we identify them or make them with the populist statements against the judges who bother, that we have seen, for example, the American president Donald Trump, populist speech that unfortunately, does it. Portillo
“What we have to do is let the judges work in peace. The cases of corruption that are being investigated will already be clarified, some in the form of files, others in the form of trial, some with condemnation, others with acquittals,” they claim in the judicial forum.
