The blockade of the General Assembly of the Judiciary for nearly four years is intertwined with the renewal of the existing model. So much so that the struggle between the PP, the minority blocking it, and the PSOE, the main party of the ruling coalition, centers above all around this renewal: PSOE defends the formula established in LOPJ in 1985. It is not reforming the PP in its two absolute majority, and the PP now wants to change it so that “the judges elect the judges”…
The European Union, which seems to prefer this formula of direct elections, says it is concerned about the danger of politicization of the judiciary in Spain, but says it is too late: justice has already been completely politicized, as the judges themselves have agreed. engage in a dangerous partisan game. Indeed, just over 55% of Spanish judges, six in total, belong to judicial associations that are clearly identified with the main parties and located in certain parts of the ideological spectrum. In institutions like the CGPJ and the Constitutional Court, their members have no problem describing themselves as “conservative” or “progressive”, and professionals who have often climbed to the top of their judicial career have used “revolving doors.” to fulfill state duties. Politicization is a fact, even in sentences: Often, without court unanimity, “progressives” and “conservatives” come together, thus giving rise to the thesis of the oldest.
This situation is certainly problematic and worries not only European institutions but all sane people in this country. But the solution is not easy. The European Commission’s Report on the State of the Rule of Law in 2022, the latest of which has been published, gives six short recommendations to Spain on this issue, and the second is: “Continue the renewal of the General Council. First and foremost, immediately after the renewal, the appointment of the member judges will meet European standards. These rules are basically two: at least half of its members are judges and these judges are elected “by their counterparts.” Spain fully complies with the first condition (12 out of 20 members are judges), but only relatively second condition, because although nominee judges are appointed by their peers, all members (12 judges and eight jurists) are elected by Congress and the Senate.
What happens is that if the judges elect the judges directly, the politicization will not only end, but will seriously worsen. Indeed, the formula for direct election of judicial representation positions by judges is strongly advocated by conservative judge associations. On April 6, 2021, three associations of judges (APM, Francisco de Vitoria and Foro Judicial Independiente) sent a letter to the European Commission requesting such a direct election, arguing that, according to a poll, 90% of them were. judges and magistrates were in favor of it. As well as making a lot of sense for a company to support any authorization presented to it, the most obvious thing is that the judiciary is very biased and very conservative for very complex political, sociological and trade union reasons.
This being the case, it is untenable naivety to deny the existence of politicization. In the US, for example, the Supreme Court provides known and detectable equilibria (or imbalances) and no one makes scandals. In any case, the Democrats have no idea of changing the system with other virtues. But it is absurd to deny that there are also two ideological poles in a complex society, in short justice. Therefore, it seems like an acceptable formula to put the judiciary on political balances, as the current system in Spain does (with the Constitution’s congratulations), so it doesn’t make sense to abandon the judiciary for a simple “advice” of the administration. society.