Serious setback for judicial independence and institutional quality in the Supreme Court
The decision of the Executive Branch to appoint two men to the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation by decree, without the agreement of the Senate and through appointments on commission, constitutes an undue advance by the president over the Legislative Branch, a serious attack on judicial independence and a clear offense to the duty to guarantee gender equality in the highest court, which seriously impacts its legitimacy and institutional quality.
“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”.
The appointment made by Decree 137/2025 deviates from the procedure established by the Constitution, and constitutes a clear abuse of a controversial power of the Executive to “fill vacancies in positions that require the approval of the Senate and that occur during its recess” by decree. The aggravated two-thirds majority provided for by the National Constitution to give agreement to the proposal of candidates is intended precisely to prevent the representative of a single political party from being able to appoint a judge. The division of powers is at the very essence of our republican system of government, and can never be overridden by not reaching political agreements regarding particular candidates. The Senate has the power not to give agreement when it considers that the conditions for proceeding with an appointment are not met, that is precisely what the Constitution orders it to do. Silence in no way enables an institutional abuse of this magnitude.
Furthermore, moving forward in this direction ignores the many citizen objections expressed during the public evaluation process of the candidates, which was enabled in compliance with Decree 222/03. The various objections raised the issue of the candidates’ lack of suitability and independence, as well as concerns about some of their views, and raised concerns about the fact that only three women, compared to 104 men, managed to reach the position of Supreme Court judge in its entire history, emphasizing the constitutional and conventional duty of the Executive Branch to nominate women who had the highest qualities to occupy the position.
Constitutional rules do not exist as a mere formality, but as a mechanism to safeguard the balance of powers. Bypassing the constitutional process for the appointment of judges compromises the legitimacy of the Supreme Court, by leaving two of its five members in a temporary and precarious situation, which exposes them to pressure and affects their credibility among citizens.
The search for political consensus for the integration of the Court is essential for its legitimacy and key to the legal security on which social and economic progress is based. Furthermore, if the concern is the efficient functioning of the Court with only three members, this court has the necessary institutional mechanisms to function in this way until its due and necessary integration.
The judiciary, especially the Supreme Court, must be a pillar of respect and trust for society. Argentina does not deserve a court appointed by decree, nor a justice system that disregards the value of independence and impartiality.
Abogados y Abogadas del Noroeste Argentino en derechos humanos y estudios sociales (Andhes)
Amnistía Internacional
Área Salud, Economía y Sociedad de CEDES
Asociación Civil Líbera, abogacía feminista
Asociación Civil por el Cumplimiento de los Derechos Humanos (ACuDH)
Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia (ACIJ)
Asociación Pensamiento Penal
Asociación por los Derechos Civiles (ADC)
Asuntos del Sur
Campaña Gqual
Católicas por el Derecho a Decidir
Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS)
Centro por la Justicia y el Derecho Internacional (CEJIL)
Colectiva Feminista La Revuelta, Neuquén, Patagonia Argentina
Democracia en Red
Directorio Legislativo
Equipo Latinoamericano de Justicia y Género (ELA)
Foro Pampeano por el Derecho al Aborto Legal, Seguro y Gratuito
Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN)
Fundación Mujeres en Igualdad
Fundación Mujeres x Mujeres
Fundación para el desarrollo de políticas sustentables (Fundeps)
Fundación para el Estudio e Investigación de la Mujer (FEIM)
Fundación Poder Ciudadano
Fundación Sergio Karakachoff
Fundación Sur
FUSA AC
Instituto de Estudios Comparados en Ciencias Penales y Sociales (INECIP)
Laboralistas Platenses
Liderar Mujer
Multi-Palabras Santa Fe
Programa Género y Derecho, Facultad de Derecho, UBA
Red de Profesoras de Derecho, UBA
Red de profesoras, Facultad de Ciencias Jurídicas y Sociales, UNLP
Red Mujeres para la Justicia
Salta Transparente
