The Constitutional Court informed Friday the last particular vote contrary to the judgment that annulled the confinement of the first state of alarm. He was the written by Magistrate Antonio Xiol, who has been delayed in his elaboration and was not ready last Tuesday, when the sentence was disseminated and the other four discrepant votes.
In his writing, the progressive magistrate exposes his thesis that there was no suspension of fundamental rights as such and that the adequate instrument to impose the confinement was not the state of exception, as he maintained the sentence, but that of alarm.
"What determines the statement of one State or another is not the severity of the crisis, but the type of crisis, that is, if the emergency situation has its origin in a serious alteration of public safety [exception] or in another Type of Circumstances [Alarm]. and adds that the 6-5 that inclined voting in favor of the state of emergency could be reversed if in the future the matter began with a composition other than the Court.
"I consider that there is no evolution of the jurisprudence in this matter in the future, in the case that this issue was submitted back to the court," says the magistrate after exposing one of the arguments that, alone should have led To the court to endorse the state of alarm.
"The suitability of the state of exception to oppose sanitary catastrophes, proclaimed a priori, in abstract and for a minimum majority in the judgment, does not compaise, among other extremes, with the 60-day period that the Constitution imposes peremptory manner This state. The majority opinion in which the sentence is based does not contain any explanation about this point, which is of great importance from the argumentative perspective, since it seems sufficient to disabide the state of exception for the purpose for which the court believes skilled". After Etas Words is when the former president of the Supreme Civil Chamber anticipates a possible future change in the theses of the Constitutional.
At this time, the renewal of TC is blocked in the absence of PP and the PSOE. However, within a year it expires the mandate of the magistrates who access by designation of the Government and the CGPJ, two in each case. The Government trusts that thereafter will disappear the current conservative majority current and will have a tribunal more sensitive to its positions.
That a renewed constitutional is going to have the opportunity to return on the border of alarm and exception states is to be seen. The magistrates have on the table a Vox resource against the second state of alarm, but the matter is already advanced and is expected to be resolved in September by the same magistrates that there are currently. Everything points to the CT again will estimate the resource and will consider the government's maneuver unconstitutional to avoid parliamentary control over the state of alarm for months.
Date Of Update: 25 July 2021, 18:28
