Sunday , May 19 2019
Home / argentina / Sudden change of the Court for criticism, pressure and cacerolazos – May 16, 2019

Sudden change of the Court for criticism, pressure and cacerolazos – May 16, 2019



In the last 48 hours, Supreme Court of Justice He was the protagonist two surprises which completely influenced the political agenda. The first occurred last Tuesday night, outside the court hours, when a two-line solution was known that required an "urgent" TOF2 to send him documentation of the route where he would be tried former President Cristina Kirchner.

The movement was directed to deactivate the start of an oral hearing that is due to begin on Tuesday 21st in which the former president will sit for the first time in the accused's court Lazaro Beez, Julio De Vido and Carlos Santiago Kirchner, among other former officials of his government. Even from some of the Court's sectors, they were encouraged and talked about a new doctrine that would analyze some documents that would have an impact on the judiciary. They called for several precursors in which the highest court decided to intervene before the judgment was delivered, as it was willing to do in the case of public works K.

Look also

Another surprise event occurred on Thursday morning when a press release was published The court requested an explanation that nothing that worked did not guarantee the impunity of the former president and confirmed this Just photocopy a file and will return it in time and form so that everything continues.

What happened in the middle to change the maximum court so quickly? All

The government went to link the Court's decision with seeking impunity. President Mauricio Macri, his staff chief, Marcos Pena and Justice Minister German Garavano, spoke of a controversial decision. Even Carrio went further and spoke of a pact between Ricardo Lorenzetti – one of his main enemies – with Kirchnerism, so there is no justice. There was also criticism from the opposition that was not Kirhner, who saw the political move behind the Court's decision.

But things were happening in the Court in the last 48 hours of maximum voltage. The decision that the documentation was requested by TOF2 had positive votes so-called. The peronical majority that integrated Horacio Rosatti, Ricardo Lorenzetti and Juan Carlos Makueda, plus Helena Highton's supplement Carlos Rosenkrantz refrained from voting because he thought that the court should not intervene until there was no sentence.

Criticism from politics added that cacerolazo felt some city neighborhoods on Wednesday night In order to reject the judgment of the Court, it created some shortcomings within the court. Likewise, a version of the alleged visit by Alberto Fernandes, the main Cristina operator, does not assist some of the judges of the Court in the days preceding the resolution. Nobody in the maximum court did not want to get stuck in the idea of ​​impunity.

This Thursday in the morning, Lorenzetti, Rosati, Makueda and Highton they had informal contacts to assess the impact of the media and social anger. Some commented that after the cursors began to talk about the rejection march they would have in the center of the scene.

Look also

There was another sign that the Court took to complete the reversal. TOF2, who must judge Cristina, postponed the dispatch of the file and began to send signals that they were not willing to be responsible for stopping the trial. They did not want to pay the costs of a controversial measure. At the Court, they also began to estimate that the script that was open had put them as responsible for using Cristina, who has been trying to avoid a photo on the indictee's bench at the beginning of the election campaign for some time.

A ten-point statement in which the Court went to explain that the application for registration of the roads to TOF 2 "does not suspend the oral procedure in progress" also revealed an internal and / differences in the Supreme Court. Rosenkrantz, President of the Court, did not participate in the drafting. He learned everything when he was already published in the Justice Information Center.


Source link