Lawyers who endorsed the 1M coup cannot be magistrates, says constitutionalist

“If these people who came to endorse what happened on 1M are elected, they would be violating the procedure and constitutional requirements to elect,” Rodolfo González sentenced.

The appointment of lawyers who favor the coup against the Judiciary on May 1 will violate the Constitution of the Republic, warned former constitutional magistrate Rodolfo González.

The Legislative Assembly is close to appointing five magistrates of the Court from a list of 30 candidates, 15 chosen by the lawyers’ union and the other 15 by the National Council of the Judiciary. This election has nothing to do with the de facto appointment of five lawyers in the Constitutional Chamber after the removal of five legitimate magistrates on May 1, events condemned and condemned by various sectors and the international community.

SEE: Francisco Díaz: “With the dismissal of the Chamber, Salvadorans have been left without protection against abuses of power”

González, who was part of the Constitutional Chamber that was characterized by stopping abuses and arbitrariness of the ephemelenist governments between 2009 and 2018, affirmed that it is clear that the dismissal of the five magistrates of the highest court and the imposition of others in their place , 1M, was a flagrant violation of the Constitution and, therefore, their acts have no legal validity.

The constitutionalist recalled that the Magna Carta says that the candidates for the Supreme Court must prove “morality and notorious instruction” before the Assembly; however, with what some said in the interviews, they show a lack of the notorious instruction required by the Constitution.

See also  Wrinkled fingers? Recovered from Covid-19 report new symptoms

“When some candidates say that there was no problem with what the Assembly did on May 1 and that there would be no problem in reforming the stony clauses of the Constitution, what they show is a notorious lack of instruction,” González stressed in an interview with El Diario from today.

According to the law, no citizen can claim that he does not know what the laws say, and even less can a lawyer.

“If these people who came to endorse what happened on 1M are elected, they would be violating the procedure and the constitutional requirements to choose,” he declared.

“In an exam like the ones that are done in the United States or England, they would not even be authorized as lawyers,” he emphasized.

“On May 1 there was a breakdown of the constitutional order,” he stressed, both due to the dismissal of the legitimate magistrates and the appointment of other lawyers.

It may interest you: “It has already been decided who will be the magistrates of the Supreme Court of Justice,” says candidate Francisco Díaz

On the other hand, González warned that it is “a blow to the institutionality” that imposed lawyers are occupying positions that do not correspond to them in the Constitutional Chamber and are exposed to legal consequences for this. “We do not know if at a time when the institutionality was strengthened if there would be the possibility of saying responsibility to these people,” he warned.

Immediately, the constitutionalist disarmed each one of the arguments used to try to justify the coup: the Assembly alleges that it has the power to dismiss, but there must be legal causes, as the Constitution says; As there is no law in this regard, he could do so at the request of the Attorney General, but the prosecutor Raúl Melara was also deposed and never asked to dismiss the magistrates or attributed any crime to them.

See also  Prescription of the obligation and the mortgage entails extinction of both.

The argument that “it was not dismissal, but substitution” is a fallacy, says González, recalling the arbitrariness and the use of public force then used to remove the legitimate and impose the appointed.

The legitimate magistrates “were dismissed and people who were not on the list were elected, in violation of Article 86 of the Constitution,” which establishes that the Assembly can only appoint lawyers from the list sent by the CNJ.

In addition, the constitutional terms established for legitimate magistrates had not concluded until 2027, he recalled.

.