In the midst of criticism the Federation of Bar Associations and Attorneys of Mendoza came out to support the reform project of the Supreme Court sent to the Legislature by Governor Rodolfo Suarez.
Through a statement, was in favor of the draw of the judges so that they understand each matter, and they agreed to set guidelines to determine in which cases the ruling of the full court corresponds.
In this way, the initiative of the ruling party received an important endorsement after strong questioning received from Aída Kemelmajer and Alejandro Pérez Hualde, former ministers of the Supreme Court. The current members of the Court, Mario Adaro and Omar Palermo, and a large part of the opposition were also against the initiative. In as much, the leader of the PRO in the province, Omar De Marchi, said that “the reform of the Constitution does not serve”.
“After analyzing the foundations and purposes of the aforementioned project and its text, this Federation -which brings together the four Bar Associations and Attorneys of the province- considers it appropriate to publicly express its full support for the initiativefor understanding that it constitutes a proposal that goes beyond the current scheme and seeks greater transparency and efficiency in the organization and management of the High Court,” the Federation of Bar Associations and Attorneys said in a statement.
For the Bar Association, the proposed regulations come to “correct deficiencies, avoid distortions and eradicate abusive practices of the system, which have been, for years, the object of sharp criticism in the forum”.
Specifically, from the organism they were in favor of avoiding the so-called “forum shopping”, that is, when the convenience forum is chosen. This situation currently occurs because the Court is divided into chambers. For example, Chamber II -where 75% of the cases are filed- is made up of the philo-peronist judges Palermo, Adaro and José Valerio (close to the radical wing).
“Likewise, discretion is eliminated when deciding the operation of the Court in fullproviding greater predictability and legal certainty by specifying those cases in which it must attend to causes of special importance for society, such as actions of unconstitutionality or in which collective interests are at stake and which undoubtedly require qualified majorities”, adds the College of Lawyers.
The head of the UCR bloc in Deputies, Cecilia Rodríguez, also came out in defense. “Undoubtedly, the objective pursued is to achieve a closer, more transparent, more efficient justice system. and efficient in resolving cases”, explained the legislator.
See also: Suarez wants to reform the functioning of the Court to end the “shopping forum”
The deputy of the ruling party also took the opportunity to charge against the opposition, which criticized the project: “The opposition before any reform project promoted by the Provincial Executive Power, expresses concern and institutional danger, but from his role he never worries about achieving a real and close justice, they do not bring concrete proposals to streamline Justice “. He added: “Those who oppose this reform are the same ones who for years had a labor system crammed with cases, with a justice that reached the worker four years after a lawsuit was filed.”