Rafael Landívar University (URL) was defined as the only workplace for the integration of the list of candidates for the new Supreme Court of Justice (CSJ). After three weeks of lack of agreement, the nomination commission defined its workplace with 35 votes. In addition, the commissioners approved a preliminary schedule to advance the process of electing courts.
Unlike the nominating committee for the Court of Appeals, which will have a mixed headquarters, the URL for the sessions and Congress for the integration of the list, the CSJ nominating committee will carry out all its work at the university.
The magistrates of the chambers were those who opposed the URL’s headquarters and wanted to take the nominating committee to the Palace of Justice. But this Sunday they decided to support the proposal of the deans, who, from the first day, sought to define the URL as the headquarters of the nominating committee.
“Let everything be here, at this university. We have never had any bad comments against this university,” said the appeals and commissioners judge, José Ortiz.
Judge Edwin Martínez was another of the commissioners who, after three weeks, gave his support for the URL as the venue. “We have never criticized or made any comments against this venue that has brought us together. Rather, what we had was a previous proposal,” he added that his proposal was never intended to generate conflicts, “due to the time we are already under, we support the commissioner’s proposal.”
Another of the commissioners who expressed his support for the URL was José Urrutia, from the College of Lawyers and Notaries of Guatemala (Cang), elected by the Aspa ticket. He said that they will deliver the payroll on time.
“There is no TREP here, there is no fraud here, everything here will be transparent and crystal-clear (…) we are willing to work here 24/7.”
The magistrate who supported the URL as the headquarters of the commission was Ramiro López, who at the time proposed that the headquarters be the CSJ itself and who was one of the voices that most questioned the university as the headquarters of the nominating committee.
His suggestion came after Dean Alejandro Arenales Farner, from the Universidad del Istmo, proposed that the URL be the only venue. He was supported by the majority of deans.
Henry Arriaga, dean of USAC, was seeking a mixed venue, with sessions held at the URL and the integration of the payroll, the CSJ. But after hearing the arguments in favor of the university, he decided to withdraw his proposal.
Grading table
Before defining the venue, the commissioners finalized the grading table, the tool with which professionals seeking to aspire to the CSJ will be evaluated.
The agreements for the distribution of grades generated discussion among the commissioners. The reason given by the deans was that the academy was not being given the necessary credit.
The initial proposal stated that there were 20 points for this category, 75 for professional merits and 5 points for human projection. This distribution was questioned by the majority of deans.
Andrés Reyes, dean of Da Vinci University, said that with this distribution, they would not give new professionals a chance because they would be at a disadvantage compared to other candidates. “We have to create a renewed and equitable CSJ, 20 points in the academy seems extremely low to me.”
Luis Fernando Cabrera, dean of the Universidad Mesoamericana, also supported the proposal, pointing out that in each nomination committee, academic merits decrease.
“How can we punish the most important aspect of academic training by lowering its score? We must keep it at 25 points, since we cannot increase academic merits.”
But Commissioner Ana López, elected by the Unidad x Justicia del Cang ticket, did not share the same opinion. She indicated that in the interior of the republic many lawyers cannot access master’s degrees and doctorates.
This point was supported by Commissioner Armando Ajin, elected by the Cang through the UGAP slate.
“Guatemala is a poor country. If we take statistics on how many professionals can access higher professional education, there are very few of us (…) I recognize that academia should be part of it, but on the other hand, we must recognize that not all of us have access to it.”
After the exchange of ideas between the commissioners, an agreement was reached on the grading table. 24 points will be assigned to professional merits, 74 to professional merits and 2 points to human projection. The cut-off line defined by the commission is 73 points, which means that only those candidates who reach this point with the grading table will be eligible as potential candidates.
#Now | How will the Nomination Committee evaluate the candidates for Supreme Court Justices?
• Academic merits – 24 pts
• Professional merits – 74 pts
• Human projection – 2 ptsThis was approved this Sunday. pic.twitter.com/NJDamrGB0L
— Henry Montenegro (@hmontenegro_GTV) August 18, 2024
Define schedule
The process of electing the courts advanced this weekend with several key points for the selection of the candidates; for example, this Sunday the commissioners approved a preliminary schedule of activities.
The schedule was as follows:
- Tuesday, August 20: Publication of call for applications
- From Tuesday 20th to Saturday 24th August: Reception of files
- Sunday, August 25: Review of received files
The schedule was approved with 36 votes in favor.
#nominating #body #CSJ #single #headquarters #Rafael #Landívar #University #URL
