The progressive members of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) They have met this Friday to start the debate on a resignation en bloc after his partner Concepción Sáez resigned this week. At the meeting they discussed how this resignation could be articulated, which, according to sources attending, will have to be individually but agreed upon so that it can have the desired effect: leave without whose the judicial power. For this they need to convince seven members who would be joined by Sáez who is already out of the Council. The intention is to force the political parties to come to an agreement to agree on the renewal of the institution that leads with the mandate expired four and a half years ago. In addition, they have decided to introduce this point in the plenary session next Thursday.
Today’s meeting was attended by the president of the CGPJ Rafael Mozo and the vowels Álvaro Cuesta, Clara Martínez de Careaga and Pilar Sepúlveda (the latter telematically). There has also been Sáez for whom there have been words of “love” among the attendees after she was the one who took the first step to leave the Council. From the progressive wing they have not been able to attend Mar Cabrejas, nor Roser Bach, nor Enrique LucasTherefore, they have decided that they will meet again next Tuesday at seven in the evening to continue the talks.
The legal doubts are multiple because it is not clear what would happen if eight of the 18 members who currently make up the CGPJ (17 if Sáez’s resignation were accepted) leave. One of the key figures is Rafael Mozo who is the one who must accept the resignations of the rest so, in principle, he would have to be the last to resign. If it did, it would also be in doubt what would happen to the Permanent Commission, the hard core of the CGPJ and in which most decisions are made. This Commission must be formed in full and is made up of the president and eight other members. Some sources state that a new Permanent Commission could be formed and it would stay working anyway, other sources disagree and point out that the Judiciary would become totally inoperative.
Next week all these fringes will have to be closed to advance in what the progressive vocals want to raise. The resignations must be individual, that is what they have made clearer, although there will have to be at least eight because otherwise what would happen is that the CGPJ could continue to function with a much more comfortable conservative majority than it currently holds. This is one of the stumbling blocks because not all members of the progressive wing seem to be willing to leave the institution.
It should be remembered that the General Council of the Judiciary must be made up of 20 members and a president. The original president, Carlos Lesmes, resigned on October 9, precisely because of the non-renewal of the body. In these years of expired mandate, another member has retired and one more has died. The CGPJ should have been renewed in December 2018 and is already the longest-running in the history of democracy.