In the judiciary, they downplayed the importance of Cristina Kirchner’s speech

A sector of the judiciary minimized to the speech that Cristina Kirchner delivered this Thursday before Chamber I of the Criminal Cassation Chamber, in which disqualified the judges and considered them to be part of the permanent power, heirs of the military dictatorship and holders of economic power.

Federal court judges and prosecutors consulted by THE NATION understood that Cristina Kirchner’s speech is a “Demonstration of helplessness”, a complaint based on what it cannot obtain in court itself: decisions that are favorable to it.

They pointed out that in the end she was a defendant defending herself in her own case. At the Supreme Court of Justice, they continue to avoid open confrontation with the executive branch. They prefer to think of it as a cry of helplessness rather than a challenge from one of the members of the executive power at the head of the judiciary.

Certain judges of the Courts of Comodoro Py translate this apparent immobility of the Court as a product of the different views within the highest court on the legal dimension of the task of judges and their political resignation.

In the cassation chamber, the first impact has already been recorded after the speech of Alberto Fernandez at the Congress: one of the judges, Alejandro slokar, requested the resignation of the president of the body, Gustavo Hornos, to visit Mauricio Macri at Casa Rosada. Cristina Kirchner deepened these criticisms and went further, demanding his departure as a judge and stressing that his visits to the Casa Rosada would constitute a crime. Hornos has no intention of resigning from his post. Although he values ​​the convenience of convening a plenary session to reduce internal tensions.

Who, if he supported Horn, was Power of justice. In a declaration signed by Diana Cohen Agrest, the entity “repudiated the attack” against the judge. “Evidence of the constant persecution of independent and honest officials who intervened in cases where state corruption is investigated, resulting in the life (and death) of ordinary citizens,” said they stated.

The expression repeated by some judges who spoke with THE NATION is that both the president’s speeches and his vice, “for now, are just words”, which do not hold true in any concrete fact.

The acting lawyer, Eduardo Casal, was one of those affected by Fernández’s speech, who accused him of protecting the federal prosecutor Carlos stornelli. But at the head of the prosecution, they repeat what their boss said in the Senate. The tax assessment committee – composed of prosecutors from all ideological backgrounds – analyzed the Stornelli case and did not encourage his pursuit. A sanction was applied to him. And it is not true that prosecutors are not investigated. In fact, at the moment, a jury is underway against one of them, accused of rape.

The group of WhatsApp judges who make up the Association of Magistrates was on fire between 10:30 a.m. and 11:30 a.m., when Cristina Kirchner monopolized the Cassation Zoom. There was outrage. Although a subsequent assessment, and with a cooler head, convinced the entity that it had already given the government a response with the statement released after the president’s speech to Congress. They expressed that “the independence of the judiciary is a central axis of the system of checks and balances which constitutes a democratic state. Without it, there is no Republic ”.

Among some of the aforementioned judges, lack of surprise prevailed. “More of the same”, “to be expected,” were some of the comments, which in any case did not underestimate the value of the vice president’s words, as they understand that public crooks can have consequences. , especially when directed. to fans of the faction itself. But Cristina Kirchner’s political defense was not surprising.

For judges, the story of the executive branch attacking the judiciary is not new. All governments, they point out, have gone through this stage of attack on justice, as their members see leaders come to power and dismiss them. And the judges, without haste, end up putting their actions under the magnifying glass. Therefore, you understand, it makes sense that they look at them with suspicion and seek to neutralize them.

More information