The Cpccs Technical Commission met on Thursday, June 20, 2024. Two of the three candidates to preside over the Judiciary Council have challenges.
The Council for Citizen Participation and Social Control (Cpccs) advances in the phase of challenges to the candidates to preside Judicial Council (CJ).
The candidates presented by the National Court of Justice (CNJ) for this designation are: Mario Godoy Naranjo, Telmo Molina Cáceres and Dunia Martínez.
The Technical Commission for the appointment of the president of the Judicial Council met on Thursday, June 20, 2024 to resolve the challenges presented.
After the analysis of the challenges, two of the six were disqualified for being out of time.
Challenges to candidates to preside over the Judicial Council
The four challenges qualified by the Commission are against Mario Godoy Naranjo and Telmo Molina Cáceres.
Marcela Estrella challenged the candidate Telmo Molina Cáceres for lack of conspicuous probity.
Roberto Cuello challenged Mario Godoy Naranjo, because he does not have notorious probity.
Roberto Cuello challenged Telmo Molina Cáceres for lack of probity and suitability.
Diana Pardo He challenged Mario Godoy Naranjo for lack of probity.
The Commission did not read the motivations for the aforementioned causes.
Now, the Plenary of the Cpccs will make the final decision on the challenges presented.
Dumia Martínez is the only one who has no challenges
None of the challenges qualified by the Commission correspond to the candidate Dumia Martínez.
The only challenge against him was presented by Wilson Borja and he was disqualified because it was presented on Thursday, June 20.
The deadline for submitting objections ended on June 19.
Of the three candidates, the name of who will replace Álvaro Roman, current president of the Judiciary Council (CJ), will emerge.
Álvaro Román assumed power after the resignation of Wilman Terán, now prosecuted in the Metastasis case and in the Judicial Independence case.
The State Attorney General’s Office investigates the crime of organized crime in the Metastasis case and obstruction of justice in the Judicial Independence case.
By: THE TRADE