political background
Argentina surfaced a week of intense contrasts. In the wake of World Cup euphoria, the nation confronted sharp political conflicts that cut across social life. The spectacle on the field offered no real benefit to any contestant, including Lionel Messi and the unified national squad, as the country shifted back to a polarized public debate. With the celebratory chorus fading, a fiercer conversation about governance and direction took center stage. The Supreme Court directed the President, Alberto Fernández, to adjust federal funding levels for the City of Buenos Aires, increasing the share from 2.32% to 2.95%. This move targeted the capital, led by one of the leading contenders to challenge Peronism in the 2023 elections, Mayor Horacio Rodríguez Larreta. This clash underscored the enduring fault lines between federal authorities and provincial leaders across the country.
Thus, Christmas carried both the mark of joy and a shadow of institutional strain that had been growing since 2020. In September of that year, Fernandez had reduced the federal funding for the nation’s primary financial, political, and cultural hub, a revision that followed a controversial decree by Mauricio Macri. Buenos Aires City responded with a court appeal, and the Supreme Court ultimately sided with the city. The president found himself aligned with a broad coalition of provinces governed by Peronism, while the opposition threatened impeachment and legal actions against top economic aides. The President faced a judiciary whose independent decisions could complicate his political plans, including rivals like Macri and former Security Minister Patricia Bullrich who aspired to leadership in 2023.
political background
“It is a political decision that bears on the election year,” Fernández said. “The Supreme Court’s ruling appears to lack a solid judicial basis and undermines the equality federalism guarantees under the National Constitution.” He sought a balance between restraint and a direct stance against rivals, aiming to protect the state’s interests while avoiding a full-scale clash. The intermediate approach involved appealing the decision while also ensuring that funds would be provided for a 90-day window. The national government would issue bonds to cover the shortfall, similar to how the Messi-led campaign helped settle a debt with Santa Fe.
“Judicial decisions are binding even when they seem unfair,” the president asserted. He described the move as the only reasonable remedy in the present moment until a broader solution emerges or Congress enacts new legislation. Economy Minister Sergio Massa followed with a bill to Parliament, proposing extraordinary sessions to provide the resources necessary to comply with the Supreme Court’s directive. The aim was to safeguard the federal framework and protect the provinces’ rights while addressing the temporary financial gaps and compensating for losses caused by the injunction.
The reaction of the city of Buenos Aires
According to Ámbito Financiero, the government would deposit the required funds into the city’s accounts, but only after the case fully settled. Mayor Rodríguez Larreta criticized Fernández for acting in a half-measure and argued that Buenos Aires had filed a separate judicial complaint asserting that the national government had not fully complied with the Supreme Court’s provisions. The bonds announced were projected to cover roughly one-third of what was owed, and the city stressed that common participation resources must be transferred daily and cannot be swapped for other financing schemes at the government’s whim.
The political scene recognized a shift in momentum as the court’s ruling began to influence national discourse. Each faction claimed victory in its own way, with supporters of the opposition arguing that the rule of law had prevailed, while others highlighted procedural limits. The ruling added to a broader narrative in which Rodríguez Larreta emerged with a stronger political position, potentially affecting the trajectory of the 2023 presidential race and signaling a national dimension to the regional contest. The situation underscored how fiscal decisions, judicial interventions, and electoral calculations intersect in a highly charged political environment, shaping public perception in both major urban centers and provinces.