[ad_1]
Faced with the resolution of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ordering the Congress of the Republic to abstain from prosecuting the constitutional prosecution process launched by a group of ex-members -marines intervened more than 30 years ago the terrorist mutiny of the prison of El Frontón, Dr. Antero Flores-Aráoz considers that the legislator does not have to bow to the vagaries of the aforementioned court and his colleague Enrique Ghersi suggests that the time has come to define the terms of the departure of Peru from the contentious jurisdiction of the above-mentioned supranational tribunal
What the Inter-American Court has done is "to reject an appeal for the clarification presented by the court". Peruvian state against the resolution that raised the issue of an accusation against the TC judges who examined the number of El Frontón, "says Ghersi, a lawyer of strong liberal origin.
If this is true, "the first problem is that the mandate of the Court is binding and binding for the Peruvian State to the extent that it is signatory to an international treaty, so that the Congress does not have any choice than to obey. "
Faced with this reality, which borders on absurdities, Ghersi considers that the Peruvian State should seriously consider the possibility of evading the contentious jurisdiction of the above-mentioned Court because of the high political content of its judgments and its resolutions
"I have long been in favor of Peru having to review their membership of the Inter-American Court, they did not want to do it when, years ago, the withdrawal was raised in a way very questionable, so Peru has returned to contentious competition, "argues Ghersi, evoking this failed attempt in the second Fujimorist autocracy government.
But in the new circumstances, there must be a debate about" the feeling that Peru continues to be by I give you a court to which nobody accepts anything substantial;
"I read my dear friend Carlos Chipoco in an interview with EXPRESO and he says that the fear of the court is that the states parties do not obey their decisions. So what do we do if the United States is not a member of the Inter-American Court? "So, if the United States, inventor of this whole human rights issue, is not a member of the Court." I wonder: what is the purpose of the Inter-American Court? "He emphasizes.
No longer if "he could not prevent the genocide he committed [Nicolás] Maduro in Venezuela nor the massacre in Nicaragua, then I wonder: What is Peru doing there? It does not make sense. "
" The Court is a perfectly useless poetic thing and we saw it in Fujimori's forgiveness where they were washing their hands, "he says.
Moreover," it seems to me that Court is a political tribunal, so this is not a court, "he points out.
UNACCEPTABLE INTERVENTION
About El Frontón, Ántero Flores-Aráoz, former Congress President , recalls that "the ex-marines claimed that it was legal to reopen a procedure already completed, as ordered by the members of the Constitutional Court, against the opinion and votes of magistrates Blume, Urbiola and Sardón. "
" The Court having ordered not to prosecute the magistrates Espinosa-Saldaña, Ramos, Ledesma and Miranda, threaten the Peruvian constitutional provisions according to which the members of the TC, among other senior officials, could be the subject of constitutional charges, it is nonsense because it violates the highest legal standards in Peru, "says the lawyer.
In furthermore, he adds, although it is true that the Constitution stipulates that international treaties are part of national law "these treaties can not be superior to the Constitution, which is at the highest level of the legal system. "
The Inter-American System of Human Rights has repeatedly claimed to be above the Constitution", only in cases where the Peruvian state has been denounced, but also in D & B Other countries of the continent, which is a serious absurdity, in addition to unacceptable interventionism at such a level. "
The Congress of the Republic, from elsewhere," He is the one who appointed the judges of the Constitutional Court, and can remove the trust that he has granted them through the process of constitutional accusation, in which he can even dismiss them and inhabit Litarnos up to ten years in the exercise of public office. "
The charge against the four judges to which we refer, and which is the subject of the Inter-American Court's resolution, is very serious," because he is accused of these magistrates changed, by illegitimate interpretation, the meaning of the vote of the magistrate then Vergara Gotelli. In the background, a TC resolution that had already caused the state and that was irremovable was changed, "he says.
Now the Congress of the Republic, ends Flores- Aráoz, has the challenge of being at the crossroads of his privileges, powers and constitutional powers, or to submit to the whims of the Inter-American Court. "
1981
At the first ratification of the American Convention, Peru did not accept the absolute contentious jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court. Unconditional acceptance was ordered by the 1979 Constitution and on the basis of the unilateral declaration of the Peruvian party submitted to the OAS in January 1981, in the second administration of Fernando Belaunde.
PLINIO ESQUINARILA
[ad_2]
Source link
