The country’s Supreme Court of Justice overturned the ruling issued by the chamber’s judges in mid-2018, and Determine that Law 27426 is constitutional. This is the rule that was approved in December 2017 – and is now no longer in effect – under which The navigation mechanism for retirement benefits has been modified By Anas. It was approved during the presidency of Mauricio Macri, amid strong protests and violence in the Plaza de los Congresos, which the people remember. Tons of stones were thrown.
For Supreme Justices Horacio Rosati, Carlos Rosencrantz, and Riccardo Lorenzetti, there is nothing reprehensible in this rule that suggests the modernization of assets. With his consent, they understood that the legislature had done so use his powers, Among them are those Amending the guidelines for retirement mobility, which it was emphasized was guaranteed by the national constitution. At that point, the sentence is consistent with what was solved before Chamber No. 3 of the Federal Social Security Chamber, which ratified the constitutionality of Article 1 of the law, In reference to creating a new account for modifications.
In the Chamber’s ruling, the success of the modernization formula stipulated in the regulations is questioned It will be implemented from the third month of 2018 and no later. However, the court The declaration of unconstitutionality nullified Article 2 of the law, which stipulated its entry into force From account updates.
The decision refers to the lawsuit filed by the lawyer specializing in social security and the retiree Miguel Angel Fernandez Pastor, Who died a year ago. The claim was made by someone who was an official at Anse, a man associated with Kirchnerism, Request to declare unconstitutional Both the article that submitted a new format, and the article that has been proven to be authentic since March 2018. Both requests were denied.
In March 2018, pensioners and retirees of the ANAS system received the General Adjustment 5.71% Which was the result of the wording of Law 27426; If the previous calculation had been applied (provided in Law 26417 in force since 2009), The increase was 14.6%. With the system that came into effect that year, Another adjustment was granted in June, in that case by 5.69%. Under the previous method, no increase could be received that month, because the pace of adjustments was semi-annual (the Macrista government law set the quarterly pace).
If the Supreme Court had declared the article unconstitutional, which it decided to enter into force in March 2018, An incentive to file claims could have been created Due to different modifications.
According to the ruling signed today by the Supreme Court justices, “In this case it can be said that Law No. 27426 – in force since December 29, 2017 – did not violate a right acquired by the beneficiaries because, by that time, “The right to receive the increase in the previous law or to obtain it had not yet been born.”
In the judicial document the idea was developed This right exists as of the month to which the income in question corresponds; In this case and according to that criterion, it was March 2018. The interpretation according to which the right (not to movement, but to apply a certain formula) existed from the beginning of the period to which the data correspond to calculate the percentage of increase was rejected.
Contrary to what the court decided now Camera failure preview It stipulated that if the law had been in effect since December 29, 2017, its application could not be “returned” to July of that year, because in that month another method of calculating the update of pensioners’ income was in force. Considering that the law has been implemented since last July, it came from the realization that it must be taken into account in order to determine the beginning of the entry into force of the new formula. The period during which the development of the variables that make up the account will be observed.
News in development