Civil society organizations and academics reject before the Senate the candidacy of Lijo and García-Mansilla to the CSJN
Gides (Social Rights Research Group), Fundeps (Foundation for the Development of Sustainable Policies), El Telar and Católicas por el Derecho a Decidir Argentina we appear before the Chamber of Senators of the Nation to explain the reasons why we consider that The candidates to fill the vacancies in the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, Ariel Lijo and Manuel García-Mansilla, do not meet the conditions required to integrate the highest body of justice in our country.
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
As academic and civil society organizations with a long history in the field of human rights, we understand that the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, as the main guarantor of the National Constitution and the Rule of Law, can only be made up of people whose experience reflects strong suitability and independence, as well as a firm commitment to constitutional principles and human rights.
Ariel Lijo faces serious accusations in the Judicial Council, including negligence in the investigation of corruption cases, unjustified delays in legal processes and accusations of illicit enrichment, in addition to criminal charges for illicit association, money laundering, bribery and influence peddling. . Furthermore, he lacks professional or academic merits to support his candidacy.
For his part, Manuel García-Mansilla holds an ideological position that could affect the defense of human rights and the international commitments assumed by our country. During his career, he has questioned the hierarchy of international human rights treaties signed and ratified by Argentina. She has also expressed her opposition to the right to abortion, even in cases where the pregnancy is the result of rape. Its incorporation into the highest body of justice of the Nation implies a serious risk for the guarantee of the rights of women and pregnant people.
Likewise, we express our deepest concern about the flagrant lack of representation of various sectors of society in the potential composition of the Supreme Court. The inclusion of new members should reflect gender diversity and thematic and regional specialization, to ensure adequate representation of a federal country like ours. It is necessary to emphasize that gender diversity in public positions and decision-making bodies is a legally binding requirement derived from our constitution and international treaties.
Furthermore, on this occasion some organizations sent questions and concerns for the candidates to answer publicly, as enabled by the procedure of the Upper House.
The questions presented to García Mansilla include: How do you justify your candidacy to the Supreme Court in a context where equal gender representation is required and your appointment would perpetuate the underrepresentation of women on the court? What concrete actions have you taken to advance women’s rights and diversities in your career? While the questions asked to Lijo were: How can her candidacy contribute to equitable gender representation in the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation? How do you guarantee transparency and ethics in your judicial decisions?
In these contexts, we believe it is essential that the Senate consult the candidates along the lines expressed here, as well as investigate in detail the crucial points that we have noted in our challenges.
We demand that the Senators rise to the occasion, and NOT agree to the approval of these candidacies in defense of Human Rights and the highest values of justice.
Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org
