A federal resolution declared the decree repealing the standard adopted by Congress invalid and ordered its immediate implementation. The executive announced that it would appeal the decision, insisting that it had no budgetary resources to comply with the decision.
The federal judge ordered the immediate application of Emergency Disability Law 27.793 by declaring invalid the article of the executive decree that had suspended its implementation. The judgment was issued by the Federal Court of Campana, led by Judge Adrián González Charvay, in response to a collective protection promoted by the lawyer Marta Lastra, disability specialist, mother of a child with disabilities and member of the CEAS Families Foundation.
The court order annulled Article 2 of the decree signed by President Javier Milei, which had made the application of the law dependent on Congress before determining the sources of funding. For the judge, this executive decision violated the constitutional order because it subordinated a norm approved by the legislature to a provision of a lower hierarchy.
Authoritarians don’t like that
The practice of professional and critical journalism is a mainstay of democracy. That is why it bothers those who believe that they are the owners of the truth.
In the ruling, González Charvay argued that the suspension of the law violates the fundamental rights of people with disabilities, including the right to comprehensive health care, inclusive education, independent living and community integration. In addition, he pointed out that the measure exacerbates the structural defunding that the sector is experiencing, affecting both people with disabilities and the institutions and providers that provide essential services.
“Suspension of the application of the Disability Emergency Law violates constitutional rights and exacerbates a situation of extreme fragility,” the judge said in his order. According to the judge, the legal brake entrenched an economic imbalance that made it impossible to cover salaries, social security contributions, taxes and maintain basic services, while benefits deteriorated sharply.
Law 27,793 was approved by Congress after the House rejected a presidential veto and declared a disability emergency until December 2027. Its main objectives include ensuring the continuity of medical and therapeutic treatments, ensuring the sustainability of care services and protecting the rights of people with disabilities and their families in the face of the economic crisis.
Since the suspension, industry organizations, family members and providers reported treatment interruptions, facility closures and job losses. This scenario was the trigger for the presentation of collective protection that led to the positive ruling announced this Friday.
The ruling ordered the immediate application of the law throughout the national territory, imposed the costs of the proceedings on the State and ordered the entry of the case in the public register of collective proceedings, strengthening its general scope.
However, the court decision was quickly questioned by the government. Despite the negative ruling, the executive branch believes that it will not allocate the necessary budgetary resources to implement the law and confirmed that it will appeal. Official sources stated that the state does not have the necessary resources to finance the emergency and that expenditures of this type must be discussed within the framework of the budget law.
“We do not have the resources to do this. We would like to comply, but the resources are not there,” the administration said, emphasizing that allocating resources to legislation with fiscal implications requires special treatment from Congress. From the Casa Rosada they claim that the implementation of the rule without funding could affect the balance of public finances and other obligations of the state.
The conflict opens a new chapter of tensions between the judiciary and the executive and once again raises the boundaries between judicial decisions and government economic policy. While disability organizations and families celebrated the ruling as support for violated rights, the lack of definition of resources creates uncertainty about the effective application of the law.
The situation thus represents a scenario of institutional and political disputes in which the formal validity of the norm goes hand in hand with the practical difficulties of its implementation in the context of budgetary adjustments and growing social demands.
PR
About The Author
