Tabaré Viera,
The President makes decisions based on partisan expediency
The shameful and unconstitutional maneuver to nullify the law of forfeiture, begins to have impact before further legislature of that rule in the House of Representatives.
is that the government and the Frente Amplio face reactions from various public facilities and its own internal policy, which might not have suspected.
President of all Uruguayans, after landing a surprise on the bench of members of the FA, to convince them not to vote to override the standard Expiry Law, continues to press its political force that is left in an unprecedented situation between the ridiculous and narrow-minded stubbornness.
The Broad Front, like all Uruguayan wonder why What Mujica parliamentary action did not stop before the instance of the Senate? Opportunity where not only did not intervene but that his wife voted and Cr Astori, who now accompanied him to the difficult task of asking them to do the opposite of what he voted.
what happened to so profoundly change your opinion? Could she have forgotten to tell the senators on the opportunity? Can you give the message passed to Lucy, even in the privacy of the home, not to vote such nonsense?
Not so. What happened is that the President, surely survey in hand, he realized then the outcome of the session in the Senate, that his political force will pay high political costs of the approval of this unfortunate law.
On the occasion, the FA won a pyrrhic victory. He lost two senators, Jorge Saravia said his republican principles of respect for the sovereign decision and not vote the law that will surely be worth the expulsion and Eleuterio Fernandez Huidobro which voted, according to mandate supporter, but announced his resignation from the bench .
Both senators joined with the strong statements of all the opposition, about the true substance of the matter is that you have installed in the national debate: the abuse of the public will expressed in two opportunities through national consultations convened precisely by those who neglected on today. "The hard thing to explain is why we call the people if they know then what he decided?" Was expressed at the opportunity.
addition Mujica knows that the unconstitutionality of a law by means of "interpretation" overrides other rules, ie extinguished retroactive effect, a matter not provided for in the Uruguayan legal system, is added the illegitimacy of the majority that it was passed in the Senate. Vote we denounce in the session itself, as illegitimate by participating Goldaracena Senator López, who promotes trials will benefit from this rule.
Even with the explanation that his participation as a sponsor has been in an honorary capacity and the interpretation given by Vice Astori that was tacitly allowed to vote, is clearly laid down in Article 97 of Senate rules, " It is forbidden to any Senator to intervene in matter relating to their individual interests. "
In this regard a number of lawyers consulted have agreed that approval of this law, SCJ which will have to decide on the constitutionality of both the substantive aspects as formal.
So reports Dr. Jaime Sapolinski, Professor of Public Law UDELAR:
"... Arguments have been raised that, according to this source, must be rejected.
a. I can not recall who advocates a certain position in a legal proceeding has no interest in that its position is ultimately dedicated. The sponsoring the complainant of a crime has a direct interest in the complaint is successful. The fact that no fees or que entienda que su propósito principal sea el de consolidar una determinada posición en la conciencia o cultura generales es, por completo, irrelevante…
b. Debe desestimarse la perspectiva de que la autorización puede considerarse implícita o tácita y que puede salvarse por medio de un pronunciamiento posterior. La autorización es un acto previo que remueve un impedimento. La falta de autorización o venia, siempre previa al acto, impide la designación en determinadas funciones o la destitución de los funcionarios inamovibles de la administración central y nadie ha sostenido que pueda sustituirse por un acto tácito ulterior.
Ha mediado an obvious omission in the complaint prior existing interest in the subject by the legislature ...
The problem that arises can be stated as follows: a. The vote of Senator Goldaracena López, who held legitimate banking, but that failed to comply with the requirement of reporting his interest in the outcome of the vote and whose vote was crucial to the decision, "issued a valid vote? In other words, can sustain the annulment of the vote, by virtue of the failure of a prohibitive rule contained in the rules of the House? b. "The vote further on the implementation of the regulations, validates previous failure?. On this second point, I think it's clear that this vote has no effect convalidatorios
In short, the problem arises of its passage, be referred to the discussion of the possible unconstitutionality of the Act to be resolved by the Supreme Court, before I raise by way of exception or ex officio, in trials that can substantiate, or even in a hypothetical case of use of the route of action by the person who revealed the law whose penalty seems imminent, injured its direct, personal and legitimate (cf. Article 258 of the Constitution).
As enshrined in Article 256 of the Charter, be declared unconstitutional on grounds of form and content and we are mentioning the episode, adding a possible constitutional challenge to formal reasons to various substantial constitutional objections which displays the text adopted. "
President Mujica then realized that in addition to pay political costs, probably the norm voted not reach the desired ends meet as a high degree of probability would be declared unconstitutional.
and openly and frankly with their known he communicated to their representatives, "if the override vote expiration of the law will be committing the triumph of FA in the next election "
But the worst conclusion must reach is that the president of all the eastern one law is good or bad depending granted more or less votes in his political strength.
a shame Is not it?
0 comments:
Post a Comment