The dominance of the judicial associations that cover the space of the right and the center-right is total in the positions of responsibility that career judges choose directly by voting. This is once again demonstrated by the elections to the governing chambers of the Supreme Court, the National Court and the 17 autonomous superior courts held this week. The conservative Professional Association of the Judiciary (APM) took 52% of the seats, while the Francisco de Vitoria Judicial Association and Foro Judicial, which define themselves as “independent”, gained 25% and 11%, respectively. The progressive Judges and Judges for Democracy obtained just 3.3% of the positions in the race.
These elections are governed by a pure majority system in which the candidates with the most votes are elected and in which each voter can vote for as many candidates as there are positions to be filled. It is a model similar to the one that the Popular Party defends implementing to elect the members of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), whose current councilors are entrusted with the task of preparing a report on the model for electing the members of the body that should be drafted next February.
The direct election by the members of the judiciary themselves and without the intervention of Parliament of the 12 members from the judicial career is also defended by three of the four judicial associations. The APM supports the direct appointment by judges “without restrictions”, while the Francisco de Vitoria and Foro Judicial include nuances to the corporate election to include “minorities” and only Judges for Democracy supports the current model.
The government chambers mainly carry out organizational and administrative tasks, not jurisdictional ones. However, internal bodies are relevant, since they approve the rules for the distribution of cases, propose substitute judges or have disciplinary powers. Its number of members is variable because it depends on the size of the regional court in relation to the number of provinces. They are made up of ex-officio and elected members, who are the ones who were renewed this week. And they are elected through a direct election model and open lists, in which people vote, not closed candidates.
In fact, in the same candidacy there may be members of several associations and non-members. However, non-associated judges are totally underrepresented in these representative bodies. The judicial career is made up of 5,416 judges and magistrates. Of them, 58% are part of one of the professional associations recognized by the CGPJ. The other 42% are not associated. Despite this, the associations once again took over a very high percentage of the positions: 110 out of 121, 90%. In contrast, only 11 non-associated judges were elected, barely 9% of the seats.
Full mastery of APM
By associations, the dominance of the conservative APM remains total. This association, with 1,412 members, represents 26% of the race. However, thanks to the direct vote of judges and magistrates, it manages to have up to 63 elected members in the government rooms, more than half of the total. It is followed by Francisco de Vitoria, which defines itself as “independent”, and second in number of members with 17% of the race. He accessed 25% of the positions, a total of 30.
Independent Judicial Forum, third in membership with 6%, obtained 13 seats in the government rooms, 11% of those that were distributed. The worst stop is the progressive Judges and Judges for Democracy. It represents 8% of the race with its 436 members and only has four elected members in the halls of government. Thus, according to these figures, the APM, Francisco de Vitoria and Foro Judicial hold 88% of the elected positions in these bodies although they represent 50% of the race.
This pure majority system has received criticism from associations that are not the majority for limiting the options of lists that are not the most voted even though they do have some support. And, consequently, for not reflecting the pluralism existing in the electoral body. In 1999, the three minority judicial associations did not attend the elections in protest against an electoral system that, they denounced, “does not allow the representation of minorities,” according to El País.
The detailed study of the results shows the predominance of the representatives of the conservative association and the underrepresentation of the minorities and, above all, of the non-associated judges. Thus, the APM managed to obtain 100% of the positions at stake in the National Court and up to five regional courts: Andalusia, Comunitat Valenciana, Castilla-La Mancha, Galicia and Madrid. In addition, it obtained an absolute majority in the Supreme Court and the courts of Asturias, the Balearic Islands and the Basque Country.
The candidacies of Francisco de Vitoria, second in number of members, obtained 100% of the elected positions in the government chambers of the courts of the Canary Islands, Cantabria and Murcia and the absolute majority in Catalonia and Extremadura. Independent Judicial Forum, for its part, achieved 100% representation in the superior court of Aragon, the majority in that of Navarra and also has representation in Catalonia, Castilla y León, La Rioja and the Basque Country. Judges for Democracy only has four representatives: two in the autonomous court of Asturias, one in La Rioja and another in the Basque Country.
The elections to the government chambers and those of the Judicial Ethics Commission – an independent body of the CGPJ, whose function is to guide the interpretation of the principles of judicial ethics – are the only ones where judges exercise their right to vote directly. . For the government chambers, voting can only be done in person or by mail, while for the Judicial Ethics Commission, telematic voting is planned.
Source: www.eldiario.es
