In 48 hours the federal judge Sebastian Casanello issued two rulings against the president’s repressive aspirations Javier Miley and his minister Patricia Bullrich. It seems that the magistrate is in a hurry to get rid of a case in which the complainants demand an immediate stop to the application of the “Public Order Protocol” of the Ministry of Security. The known “anti-picketing protocol” that, in two months of government, the repressive forces in command of the brains of Freedom Advances They tried to apply without success, but leaving in the way a stream of wounded and detained.
A protocol that is already being observed and questioned in international bodies such as the UN Human Rights Council and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). Surely in the reasoning of Casanello These alerts weigh internationally. At least, you will think, in this case you should not be stuck due to inaction or complicity.
December 18, 2023 Celeste Fierroelected legislator of Left Front for him MSTrequested in Comodoro Py a precautionary measure against the so-called “protocol” so that its “unconstitutionality”. And he asked that, until the underlying issue was resolved, the Executive Branch be ordered refrain from applying it in union, political and social protests.
The file went through several courts, after successive declarations of “incompetence” by other judges. Until it finally fell into the office of Casanellowho agreed to treat it because he considered it an action of habeas corpus that deals with federal matters. As reported on Monday in another notethe owner of the Federal Criminal and Correctional Court 7 first ordered Ministery of security report within 72 hours on which laws, reports and legal parameters they based themselves to put together the “protocol” and, at the same time, what complaints they received for its application.
The portfolio of Bullrich responded the same Monday, first trying to challenge Fierro, the complainant, for being a left-wing deputy. She then tried to say that the “protocol” is based on some rules international. Regarding the challenge to Fierro, the judge flatly rejected the crude proposal. Regarding the legal basis of the “protocol”, the judge states that “from his response it emerges that were not consulted others state agencies, Civil society organizations in International organizations”, as it should have been done.
At the same time, Casanello questioned that the Government has not yet responded to the requirements of the UN Human Rights Councilwhich in January asked the Argentine State for an explanation of the reasons for the departure from international standards related to the protection of “right of peaceful assembly”. For the judge, this departure is expressed in “considering from before a any gathering as violent or criminal” and in “the registration and use of personal information of the people gathered (which) must be subject to constitutional and legal limits, and do not violate privacy of the protesters”; both things they have been doing Bullrich and company.
He wrote all that Casanello in a new resolution, published this Tuesday. But despite these more than reasonable questions, The judge threw a cross at Bullrich. Because on the one hand it agrees to order a precautionary measure as an “umbrella for the protection of fundamental democratic rights and freedoms”, but on the other hand does not force the Government to suspend the application of the “protocol”, as requested by the plaintiff. According to the judge, “it seems possible to achieve reinsurance through the guidelines” that he himself suggests later.
Plenty of fundamentals
But what are those “guidelines” that he suggests? Casanello? The judge is specific when questioning the Ministery of security for his intention to apply his repressive plan outside a rigorous legal and judicial framework. “It is noted that the terms of the Protocol translate into instructions to the security forces that may be first confused as authorizations of punitive power outside the criminal norm emanating from the legislative power and/or from the interpretation reserved for the judicial power.”
As is known, the workhorse of Bullrich and his henchmen to justify the application of the “protocol” is the article 194 of the Penal Codeinstituted by the dictatorship of Juan Carlos Onganíasupported by all the governments that succeeded it in these more than fifty years and whose reason for being is criminalize those who protest interrupting circulation routes such as streets, routes and bridges.
As explained many times in this diary, Article 194 has been questioned in repeated judicial cases as a legal “basis” to accuse, prosecute and condemn those who protest in defense of human, labor, environmental, student rights, etc. Coinciding with this, in his ruling Casanello tells the Government that it cannot “by mere administrative decision” apply an article of the Penal Code to situations that that norm “does not expressly include”.
Hence the judge calls “rigorously place the task of the security forces within the Constitution and the laws” and that Executive power do not try to replace Legislative y al Judicial. “In situations that imply the possible commission of a crime (…) the security forces personnel must (…) carry out immediate consultation with the corresponding court and/or prosecutor’s office (…) In In all cases, the authority must strictly adjust to the facts and situations that objectively respond to what the law, and only the law, prescribes,” he says in his writing.
But, as at the same time Casanello does not give rise to the request for suspension of the “protocol”, it only limits itself to suggesting to the Government that “the use of violence must be the last resort” and that if it is exercised “it must include a proportionality test that takes into account “the rights and freedoms violated.” That is to say, a failure that remains halfway.
Exhorts but does not order
The judge is clear in stating that “in our Constitutional System of Law, free movement coexists with the exercise of other civil and political freedoms and rights, such as free expression, association and assembly, and the right to petition – and, particularly, criticize- the authorities. These latter rights have a special value within the democratic system. Being closer to the democratic nerve of the Constitution, they deserve special protection.” However, in his ruling does not order to stop the application of the same repressive practices that it questions and that they already left 285 injured y dozens of detaineesas reflected a report from the Provincial Commission for Memory.
Finally, after explaining that the “protocol”, as written and as explained many times Bullrichlacks foundation and represents an advance of the Executive power about him Legislative and the Judicialthe judge limits himself to “exhort the Ministry of National Security, so that within the framework of its powers, it adjusts the actions of the police and security forces to the limits imposed by our Constitutional System of Law”. That is, it can continue to be applied but with more institutional “care”, starting with “announce” y “Consult” to judges and prosecutors when putting it into practice.
It is worth saying that Casanello only “exhorts” the Government to take certain measures that he himself suggests. But exhorting is not ordering. And then the ruling ends up being ineffective, based on the fact that everything must be resolved when the underlying issue is defined, that is, the unconstitutionality of the “protocol.”
Like Bullrich and its officials were unaware of the existing regulations, the judge suggests that they pay attention to the “standard of protection imposed by international human rights standards” and at the same time “instruct the federal police and security forces to observe appropriate behavior to that standard.” It seems like a joke, but it is one of the resolutions to his ruling.
Beyond self-imposed limits Casanello to stop the repressive advance of the Governmentthe foundations that the same judge exposes and develops in his ruling enough to understand the level of illegality and abuse of authority that Patricia Bullrich is exercising and, by transitive property, the forces that it drives, such as Federal policethe Gendarmerie and the Prefecture.
Precisely this Tuesday, also in Commodore Pylawyer Matías Aufieri appeared as a plaintiff in a case in which Bullrich y the leaders of the Federal are accused of “injuries” aggravated by “functional abuse” y “treachery”, “illegal pressures” y “authority abuse”. Workparliamentary advisor to the bench of the Left Front Unity and reference of Center of Professionals for Human Rights (CeProDH) received last Thursday a rubber bullet hit his left eyefor which he was operated on and is waiting to regain his vision.
The serious injury suffered by Work occurred within the framework of the brutal repression in front of Congresswhere Bullrich and his forces not only committed the abuses that he highlights Casanello in his ruling this Tuesday, but until They violated their own “protocol” attacking those demonstrating on the sidewalks with gas and bullets. The case in which the human rights lawyer appeared as a plaintiff is being processed in the Criminal and Correctional Court 10in charge of Julian Ercolini. Will he also be worried about not being stuck in the face of questions from the UN and the IACHR? Will have to see.
Casanello’s complete ruling
Casanello Ruling on Anti-Picket Protocol – February 6, 2024 by daniel.satur18 on Scribd