A total of twelve members compared to eight support a report that is very critical of the Draft Law on EProcedural efficiency
MADRID, 22 Jul. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The Plenary of the General Council of the Judicial Power (CGPJ) has approved this Thursday by twelve votes to eight a very critical report with the last legislative project of the already former Minister of Justice Juan Carlos Campo, the Law of Procedural Efficiency, of which it questions its temporary nature linked to the health crisis situation.
The report approved by the governing body of the judges, of which the members Mar Cabrejas, Juan Martínez Moya, Gerardo Martínez Tristán and Concepción Sáez – members of all political sensitivities within the body – have been speakers, questions the suitability of some reform measures adopted in view of the situation generated by the coronavirus and which, nevertheless, are articulated with a vocation of generality and permanence.
The report recalls that the legislation has already provided the legal system with normative instruments to deal with the COVID pandemic and insists on the need for the laws to be based on a more calm examination.
The Draft Law on procedural efficiency is included in the 2030 agenda for Justice and contains measures to adapt the work of the courts to the “digital world”, such as video identification and alternative means for the resolution of conflicts that allow ‘unblocking’ the courts.
For the CGPJ, reflection on the suitability of the measures provided is all the more necessary when through them budgets or procedural requirements are established that condition the exercise of the right to judicial protection.
The report also questions the reference to the incorporation of the new values of interdependence, solidarity and humanism in the norm, whose objective is ventured to be to introduce the idea of the responsibility of citizenship and its contribution to the sustainability of the Public service of Justice.
Thus, according to the author of the report that is being debated, a conflict resolution regime is designed prior to jurisdiction, which remains in a second step, with the risk of seeing its constitutional function degraded, whose relevance is relativized.
INTRODUCTION OF TECHNOLOGY
Nor should the enhancement of the use of technologies displace such principles, the report points out, but they should coexist harmoniously, in an adequate and balanced balance, so that the technology serves the purposes of the process, but does not constitute or configure the process itself.
In another vein, the normative technique can be improved, according to the report. The pre-legislator has chosen to introduce the reforms in the procedural laws through articles of the draft law, instead of doing so by means of final provisions through which the modifications in the respective procedural laws are introduced, according to the analysis carried out.
In addition, the report lacks a greater presence of the criteria of this governing body of the Judiciary when it comes to normatively articulating the procedural streamlining measures in order to provide the Justice system with the degree of efficiency, effectiveness and effectiveness that is advocated from the projected standard.