In Moncloa, there is the conviction that the Constitutional Court will end up putting things in their place in relation to the sentence of Álvaro Garcia Ortiz. He place what do you want Pedro Sanchezit’s understood.
The President of the Government himself, taking advantage of his intervention this Tuesday during an event for the centenary of the death of Pablo Iglesiasquestioned the Supreme Court ruling published a few hours earlier.
He did so by insisting on the innocence of the Attorney General and accusing the PP of wanting to “give lessons”.
“Today they are lecturing on what? From a conviction to a state attorney general who stood up for the truth and the institution of the State Attorney General’s Office,” he said, ignoring the conviction for revealing secrets and focusing on the couple’s alleged tax fraud. Isabel Diaz Ayuso.
He also said that the one who “must ask for forgiveness” is “Ms. Ayuso” and “the one who must ask for responsibility from Ayuso is Mr. Feijóo”, thus exonerating himself from any obligation for having named García Ortiz and supporting him after his accusation.
Three days after the announcement of the judgment, on November 23, Sánchez had already suggested that “other jurisdictional bodies” could intervene to modify the Supreme Court.
“There are other jurisdictional forums in which I understand that some of these aspects will have to be resolved once the content of this decision is known, which, perhaps, could be controversial and will have to be resolved by other forums,” he said in Johannesburg, where he traveled for the G20 summit.
The Executive’s thesis regarding the Supreme Court’s decision coincides with the judges’ dissenting vote. Ana Ferrer and Susana Polo, that there can be no conviction because there is no evidence.
For the two judges, even if the judgment maintains that the leak came from the general prosecutor’s office, “It is not described how, where or by what means “This so-called ‘direct intervention’ by García Ortiz is taking place, not to mention his knowledge and collaboration with a third party.”
The Government clings to this text and, privately, attacks the High Court. His thesis is that it is an offensive by “conservative magistrates” against the executive of Pedro Sánchez.
The anger, already visible when the judgment was announced, had barely subsided twenty days later.
Towards a new TS/TC clash
Government sources understand that there are many options that the Constitutional Court annuls the decision of the Supreme Court in the future.
This would be a new clash between the two courts, as has already happened on issues such as ERE case and especially with the amnesty law and its application to independence leaders.
The government hopes that the progressive majority of the Constitutional Court will once again rule in favor of its interests, resulting in institutional deterioration.
In the Supreme Court there are only career judges, while the Constitutional Court is a political court, elected by Congress, the Senate, the government itself and the General Council of the Judiciary.
With the aim of paving the way for Cándido Conde-PumpidoPresident of the TC, two ministers worked hard on Tuesday to ridicule the Supreme Court’s ruling.
In reality, Moncloa tried to have a harsh and more institutional response. They took care of the first Oscar Lopez And Oscar Puente.
The Minister of Digital Transition and leader of the Madrid socialists declared on TVE: “I was able to read what I was able to read, because it has just come out, but in view of what I was able to read and what I heard from you, “I know of many Hollywood scripts with less creativity than this sentence.”
The Minister of Transport went further on social networks, ironizing with some expressions of the sentence. “The problem with Jack the Ripper It was him or someone close to him. “He always looked like that.”
In front, the Minister of Defense and career magistrate, Marguerite Roblesexpressed his “total and absolute confidence” in Justice. He only criticized the fact that the judgment was known first, then the sentence.
Robles stressed that there was no unanimity in the House (five votes to two) and concluded by displaying his “full” confidence in the courts and institutions, because this confidence is “an obligation” in a rule of law. Otherwise, “democracy doesn’t work,” he said.
A few days ago, he was Minister of the Presidency and Justice, Felix Bolanoswho, although he still disagrees with the judgment, has already tried to set this more institutional tone when it was his turn to establish the government’s position.
At the critical extreme was Sumar, who, through his deputy, Enrique Santiago He accused the Supreme Court of having carried out an “inquisitorial procedure without evidence” against the government and against the attorney general.
Also the second vice president, Yolanda Diazthen encouraged citizens to demonstrate against the Supreme Court. And he did it from the Moncloa press room. Until now, there has not been a single relevant mobilization.
About The Author
