The session of the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ) nomination committee on Wednesday, August 7, lasted only 33 minutes. Some commissioners questioned whether they needed 48 hours’ notice to meet, otherwise the committee would have been illegal.
The commissioners who argued against the meeting were the magistrates of the chambers José Ortiz and Jorge Canos Villatoro, who indicated that holding the session could lead to legal appeals against them, due to not respecting the deadlines of the call.
But the chairman of the commission, Miquel Cortés, and a minority group of the commission think differently. Since the commission is in permanent session, in the opinion of the professionals, a notice is sufficient and it is not necessary to call a meeting two days in advance.
In an attempt to resolve the issue, Cortés held a round of voting to determine who supported the session; the proposal received 18 votes in favor.
This was supported by the president, the group of deans, with the exception of the representatives of the Regional University and the University of San Carlos of Guatemala who presented excuses, the members of the College of Lawyers and Notaries of Guatemala (Cang) elected by Unidad x Justicia and the Trade Union Coalition.
But in this vote, a lawyer elected by the Union group and another elected by Aspa also supported the vote. Judge José Hernández, titular secretary of the nominating committee, also supported continuing with the session.
But in a second voting event to determine who was against the session, 12 commissioners voted in favor of it. Among them were the magistrates and commissioners elected by the Cang.
Four judges did not vote, including Ortiz, while the secretary voted in favor of both votes. On the side of the bar association, César Calmo, elected by Unión, also preferred not to vote.
Given the lack of agreement, either to continue or to stop the session, the president opted to resume the session on Tuesday. Although neither of the two positions obtained the necessary 25 votes.
Session stuck
Although there were arguments against today’s session, the president of the nominating committee said that they were within the law. Indicating that the meeting was possible because it was a permanent session.
“The same commission said that the notification was sufficient to continue with the meeting within the session. We must clearly distinguish between these two words so as not to confuse ourselves. The session is session one – the one that is currently taking place – and we scheduled 15 sessions to be able to deliver the list, but we are within session one where there are meetings.”
This apparent change in the nominating committee’s criteria is causing different interpretations of the law that, according to Cortés, affect the development and progress of the commission.
“These are legal nuances, they are interpretations and we can have a legal debate but this does not help to advance the agenda (…) this does not help, rather it hinders. But we must respect the opinion of the commissioners.”
After the failed attempt at a meeting, the nominating committee agreed on a new date to respect the 48-hour deadline. The next call for the commissioners of the nominating committee to the CSJ will be this Saturday, August 10.
#CSJ #nominator #suspends #session #postpones #meeting #Saturday
