7493
Impeachment constitutes an instrument of control in a democratic republic. There are differences in the appraisal of the "bad performance" cause for such trials, depending on whether it is the prosecution of political officials or judicial magistrates. That is because the guarantees of jud...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo publishedVersion |
| Lenguaje: | Español |
| Publicado: |
Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Derecho. Departamento de Publicaciones
2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=juridica&cl=CL1&d=HWA_7493 https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/collect/juridica/index/assoc/HWA_7493.dir/7493.PDF |
| Aporte de: |
| id |
I28-R145-HWA_7493 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| institution |
Universidad de Buenos Aires |
| institution_str |
I-28 |
| repository_str |
R-145 |
| collection |
Repositorio Digital de la Universidad de Buenos Aires (UBA) |
| language |
Español |
| orig_language_str_mv |
spa |
| topic |
Juicio político Impugnaciones Controles Independencia judicial Casación legislativa Impeachment Challenges Controls Judicial independence Legislative unification |
| spellingShingle |
Juicio político Impugnaciones Controles Independencia judicial Casación legislativa Impeachment Challenges Controls Judicial independence Legislative unification Gelli, Maria Angelica 7493 |
| topic_facet |
Juicio político Impugnaciones Controles Independencia judicial Casación legislativa Impeachment Challenges Controls Judicial independence Legislative unification |
| description |
Impeachment constitutes an instrument of control in a democratic republic. There are differences in the appraisal of the "bad performance" cause for such trials, depending on whether it is the prosecution of political officials or judicial magistrates. That is because the guarantees of judges are also guarantees of citizens to be judged by independent and impartial magistrates. The Supreme Court is under siege from the emerging political power of popular elections. Impeachment was sometimes used as an effective means to retain power by controlling the judiciary. It occurred in 1946/47 with the dismissals of three judges of the Supreme Court and the Attorney General, and between 2003 and 2005 with two judges of the Court. New attempts to dismiss the Supreme Court began in 2023. The challenges that the first proceedings received affected the subsequent legitimacy of the Court. The second trials were judicially challenged, but controls over those prosecutions were lax. The main objection to both political processes was that they revolved around the interpretation of the law made by the judges, using a type of legislative cassation on judicial rulings. We also observed some violations of due process that must be guaranteed to the magistrates. What emerges clearly is the disagreement of legislators with judicial decisions and the notorious non-compliance with defense assurances, especially in the treatment of summoned witnesses, violating constitutional and conventional guarantees. These can find their way in the challenges and judicial controls available. |
| format |
Artículo Artículo publishedVersion |
| author |
Gelli, Maria Angelica |
| author_facet |
Gelli, Maria Angelica |
| author_sort |
Gelli, Maria Angelica |
| title |
7493 |
| title_short |
7493 |
| title_full |
7493 |
| title_fullStr |
7493 |
| title_full_unstemmed |
7493 |
| title_sort |
7493 |
| publisher |
Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Derecho. Departamento de Publicaciones |
| publishDate |
2023 |
| url |
http://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=juridica&cl=CL1&d=HWA_7493 https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/collect/juridica/index/assoc/HWA_7493.dir/7493.PDF |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT gellimariaangelica 7493 AT gellimariaangelica lainstitucionalidadargentinaelenjuiciamientoalacortesupremayelalcancedelarevisionjudicial AT gellimariaangelica argentinasinstitutionalframeworktheimpeachmentofthesupremecourtandthelimitsofjudicialreview |
| _version_ |
1824359847637811200 |
| spelling |
I28-R145-HWA_74932024-08-28 7493 Impeachment constitutes an instrument of control in a democratic republic. There are differences in the appraisal of the "bad performance" cause for such trials, depending on whether it is the prosecution of political officials or judicial magistrates. That is because the guarantees of judges are also guarantees of citizens to be judged by independent and impartial magistrates. The Supreme Court is under siege from the emerging political power of popular elections. Impeachment was sometimes used as an effective means to retain power by controlling the judiciary. It occurred in 1946/47 with the dismissals of three judges of the Supreme Court and the Attorney General, and between 2003 and 2005 with two judges of the Court. New attempts to dismiss the Supreme Court began in 2023. The challenges that the first proceedings received affected the subsequent legitimacy of the Court. The second trials were judicially challenged, but controls over those prosecutions were lax. The main objection to both political processes was that they revolved around the interpretation of the law made by the judges, using a type of legislative cassation on judicial rulings. We also observed some violations of due process that must be guaranteed to the magistrates. What emerges clearly is the disagreement of legislators with judicial decisions and the notorious non-compliance with defense assurances, especially in the treatment of summoned witnesses, violating constitutional and conventional guarantees. These can find their way in the challenges and judicial controls available. Fil: Gelli, Maria Angelica. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Derecho. Buenos Aires, Argentina Fil: Gelli, Maria Angelica. Academia Nacional de Ciencias Morales y Políticas, Instituto de Política Constitucional. Buenos Aires, Argentina Argentina Gelli, Maria Angelica 2023 El juicio de responsabilidad política constituye un instrumento de control en la república democrática. Existen diferencias en la apreciación de la causal de mal desempeño, según se trate del enjuiciamiento a los funcionarios políticos o a los magistrados judiciales porque las garantías de los jueces lo son también de los ciudadanos a ser juzgados por magistrados independientes e imparciales. La Corte Suprema sufre el asedio del poder político emergente de las elecciones populares. En ocasiones se utilizó el juicio político como un medio eficaz para conservar el poder controlando la magistratura. Ocurrió en 1946/47 con las destituciones de tres jueces de la Corte Suprema y del Procurador General y entre 2003 y 2005 con dos magistrados del Tribunal. Nuevos intentos de destituir a la Corte Suprema se iniciaron en 2023. Las impugnaciones que recibieron los primeros procedimientos afectaron la legitimidad posterior del Tribunal. Los segundos juicios fueron impugnados judicialmente, pero los controles sobre esos enjuiciamientos fueron laxos. La principal objeción a sendos procesos políticos fue que giraron en torno a la interpretación del derecho hecha por los jueces, empleando una especie de casación legislativa sobre los fallos judiciales. También las violaciones del debido proceso que deben garantizarse a los magistrados. Lo que surge nítido es la disconformidad de los legisladores con las decisiones judiciales y el incumplimiento notorio de las seguridades de la defensa, en especial en el tratamiento de los testigos citados, vulnerándose garantías constitucionales y convencionales. Éstas pueden encontrar su quicio en las impugnaciones y controles judiciales disponibles. application/pdf 0326-7431 (impreso) 2451-5795 (en línea) Juicio político Impugnaciones Controles Independencia judicial Casación legislativa Impeachment Challenges Controls Judicial independence Legislative unification spa Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Derecho. Departamento de Publicaciones info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/ Revista Jurídica de Buenos Aires, a.48, no. 106, t.2 La institucionalidad argentina, el enjuiciamiento a la Corte Suprema y el alcance de la revisión judicial Argentina's institutional framework, the impeachment of the Supreme Court and the limits of judicial review info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/cgi-bin/library.cgi?a=d&c=juridica&cl=CL1&d=HWA_7493 https://repositoriouba.sisbi.uba.ar/gsdl/collect/juridica/index/assoc/HWA_7493.dir/7493.PDF |