The plenary session of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) this Thursday consummated a break within the progressive bloc that has resulted in one of the Council. Several sources consulted indicate that the progressives had prepared a proposal that implied that this group, which until now was in a minority in this commission – chaired by Perelló and made up of seven councilors – would become a majority (four progressive members compared to three conservatives). However, one of the two members proposed by Sumar, Carlos Hugo Preciado, developed an alternative proposal and has agreed with the conservative group on a new distribution that gives the majority to the conservatives with four councilors, compared to two progressives and Preciado himself, who in a note distributed by his entourage defines himself as an “independent progressive.” The president of the body, Isabel Perelló, has adhered to this formula, which is finally the one that has been imposed with 12 votes (the 10 conservative members, Preciado and Perelló) compared to nine (the rest of the progressive members).
Preciado’s distance from the rest of the progressive members has been evident for months, but this Thursday’s decision makes it official and implies, in practice, that the CGPJ is divided into three groups: one formed by 10 conservative members, another by nine progressive members and a third made up only of one of the two members proposed by Sumar. But this Thursday’s plenary vote also shows that Perelló is closer to this member and to the conservative core than to the progressive.
With this new distribution, the progressives lose weight in the main commission, which will be made up of Preciado, two progressive members (Bernardo Fernández and Argelia Queralt) and three conservatives (Eduardo Martínez Mediavilla, Isabel Revuelta, Carlos Orga and Alejandro Abascal). Sources consulted also point out that the conservatives and Preciado have monopolized the positions of judicial members, positions that are more contested than those of legal advisors, which are those that have been assigned to the progressives.
Regarding the rest of the legal commissions, the general rule agreed upon last year has been followed, which implies that the group that chairs a commission will have a minority of members in it, so that the majority and the presidency never fall on the same side. Furthermore, Preciado is not part of any of them, so it does not affect the balance of power.
The progressives will continue to preside over the disciplinary commission (with Fernández Seijo at the head), which is the only one whose composition cannot change during the five years of the CGPJ’s mandate; In addition, two members of this group will also be in charge of the qualification commission (Ángel Arozamena) and the equality commission (Lucía Avilés). In these three, the conservatives will have a majority of members, while the conservatives will preside over economic affairs (José Antonio Montero), in which there will be only one member from this bloc, compared to two progressives.
In addition to these key commissions, the plenary session has also renewed the so-called regulatory ones. The conservatives and Preciado had agreed on a distribution outside the interests of the progressives and that implied that Preciado was part of three of them (the judicial school, judicial career and equality) and the other member proposed by Sumar, Inés Herrero, was left out of all of them. Given the warning from the progressives to take legal action, it was two conservative members, according to these sources, who convinced Precia to leave the judicial school commission so that Herrero could enter.
The note released by Preciado’s entourage points out that the “balance between sensitivities has been generally preserved in the renewal”, and adds: “although the progressives closest to the Ministry of Justice have lost weight with respect to the independent progressive options”, a trend in which, according to this text, only he is a part.
