A 21-st century coup?

Libertad y Progreso

LA NACIÓN: Cristina Fernández has called, directly and indirectly, a march for the Supreme Court to resign.

Her arguments are Kirchnerist classics that cannot hide its long line of attacks on the judicial system, which began in Santa Cruz when Prosecutor Sosa was removed and was not reinstated despite three explicit decisions by the Supreme Court of Justice.

The absolute refusal to accept the tripartite power system established by our Constitution also led the then almighty Néstor Kirchner to remove several judges from the Court after taking office in 2003, achieving a court that was, at the very least, sympathetic to his government.

Soon after, they managed to sterilize the Judicial Council with 2006’s Law 26,080, ordered by the Kirchner couple, which has finally been invalidated by the Court at the end of 2021.

That total disobedience of the constitutional limits was demonstrated endlessly with the permanent hostility towards any judge who dared to disobey the Kirchnerist ukases. There are so many examples that it would take too long to list them here.

This attitude has allowed them to achieve a massive release of their supporter that had been convicted since 2019, due to the illegal and incomprehensible judicial fear.

I say illegal because, like members of the armed and security forces, judges and prosecutors should not be cowards: those who are afraid and do not overcome it must leave. Of course, that does not happen and so it goes on.

And I say incomprehensible because Kirchnerism has not been able to fire practically any judge since 2003, except for two isolated cases and the members of the Court already mentioned. Thus the fear, in addition to being illegal, is unjustified.

In any case, the “K” have discovered that many judges and judicial officials can be intimidated by protests and threats and that is why this 21st-century version of the 20th-century coup.

Art. 23 of the Constitution is very clear when it orders that “… in the event of an internal disturbance…that endangers the exercise of this Constitution and of the authorities created by it …” exceptional measures must be adopted, which can go as far as suspending constitutional guarantees.

This is so because our system is representative: the federal authorities are the Congress, the Executive Power and the Judicial Power. Nobody can claim to represent or speak for “the people”, which is prohibited by art. 22. This article also establishes that whoever does so commits the crime of sedition.

Those who believe that any of those who exercise the powers established in the Constitution are doing so badly that they should be removed, have a procedure established by arts. 53 and 59 of the Constitution: that there be an accusation decided by the lowe chamber at Congress for a political trial carried out in the Senate.

Whoever wants to remove legitimate authorities in any other way, even pressing for their resignations, is violating the Constitution and eventually committing the crime of sedition, if the requirements of arts. 226 and 226 bis of the Criminal Code are met.

Whether or not there is a crime, the concrete anti-constitutional modes that were our cross during the 20th century seem to have mutated: they are no longer some military incentivized by the opposition, but certain anti-establishment sectors of politics, who use the weapons of social agitation, excesses and riots mounted with money, barrabravas and criminals.

We do not have to let them: we have to show that we will not let them strike a blow against the independence of Justice.

Here it is not about CFK, nor about MM, nor about this or another Court.

It is about respecting and applying our Constitution, being civilized, achieving institutional stability and having respect for public order.