TC – Pedro Olaechea Expone motivos de la Demanda Competencia

we developed the center of lima with
our partner jimmy chinchay jimmy how are you
hello carla tello so we meet an extremely important audience is the
request submitted by the commission congress standing against the
dissolution of parliament to pedrol etxea
of the magistrates of the court constitutional republic can and body
arbitrarily between one of the clearest positions
put on for defense is that one of the reasons
and the fundamental was obstructionism from congress to executive
would happen at the request of the president do very concrete in facts that report the
relation between and speaks not only has he been president
of the congress has been vice president of budget and has been minister of state
by the government of pedro pablo kuczynski that I think the president of
vizcarra continues on that line then let’s analyze what the work has been
what has been between the congress and the executive three budgets
submitted three approved budgets three delegations of worship three
delegations approved powers 213 Legislative decrees 210 in the
legal order three observed the percentage of archived projects of
total bills submitted by the executive branch has been 2.9
when the order of the president humala were 4.4 and in the case of the doctor
garcía 11% to say there has been nothing strange
and a relationship between the executive and the legislative even more so in the supervisory function
interpellation requests submitted by president humala 42 the congress the republic of 2016 to
2019 13
interpellation request approved by Mr. Humala 20’s request for this
period from 2016 to 2019 that concerns us 10
censures filed 12 censures presented one in this order
censures approved by Mr. Humala 2 for this period an accomplished censorship
one in each case it is worth saying where it is obstructionism in the management of
been in what the state itself and especially from the executive branch is
important to note that in that regard having already been minister of state
I can say that that didn’t happen that peace working with the congress could
change the fishing policy that has added a point to the pp and 2017 of the
2018 plus what worked out what could occur this year which equals more than
three billion dollars to progress of the nation then I don’t think it’s
valid to present a position of obstruction but let’s pass generated and edify the problem that
can also be verified with facts and we will develop them taking in
count the time granted by the presidency on 30
May Mr. Salvador del Solar urges to the congress not to modify the content
essential of each project submitted to the trust and set a maximum term for
your approval we began to erode
the balance of powers we began to impose conditions beyond what is
the general request pieces of legislation on impositions that are
outside the legal system and it I was looking to impose conditions of
executive to legislative so on June 4, 2019 on
prime minister salvador del solar supports the issue of trust and
Finally Martin Vizcarra declares guide that essence had to be respected and
term and this meant an interference in
the powers of parliament it is so on July 28 from 6
of the six political projects are it presents a difference in terms of
essence and term nothing more and nothing less it was about parliamentary immunity
but what had happened he hadn’t taken out exactly what he
wanted but that had been offered by first time in republican history and
has parliamentarian but what had happened
had not taken out exactly what wanted but that had been offered by
first time in republican history the congress accepted to be out of his
parliamentary jurisdiction the president of the supreme court will present before this
court before this court constitutional the final vote that
will determine whether or not if the removal of the parliamentary immunity jurisdiction or
be it looked like little this was court who will determine at the end of
day a session given by the fueros del congress to look for a political way out
to a situation that was requested for remove any your request on the
protection or shielding of parliamentarians
at the congress that is little that this court out the supreme judge in the
matter this implies that little by little it was sought
obliterate dominate basically kneel the congress at a
will that was not democratic it was affecting the balance of
powers is so this reform is considered by the president as that
It hadn’t been what he had wanted and in something have been modified or at
having changed the essential content that he presents on July 28 we went out with
a new position since the six projects were for the fight against
corruption and had not served because this court was to be the court that
at the end of the day I was going to decide on lifting of the jurisdiction or not
decides to advance the elections again the advance is requested and in this
case the justice minister then the Mr. Vicente Zeballos begins to
threaten the deadline and again with the formula that had been given I don’t know
I still respected the fueros and the independence that all democracy marks
democracy and a balance is indicated between powers he was looking for
punch that that balance is so I arrived on September 26
and on September 26 just the congress according to its attributions
send this project to the archive by majority of the constitution commission
not for one or two people but for the most enforcing his jurisdiction this
carries what he was looking for the
executive through the president of vizcarra as I repeat was obliterate the
congress could not congress get an independence a situation in the
I had to go to dialogue to negotiate as a couple wanted to have a congress
subject wanted to have a congress on the which one could I have
it is so that he finally finds the vehicle that could achieve this path
this vehicle was the procedure that it was taking place inside the congress on
the election of new magistrates for this great court and how it was going to be done
in the same way that six of the tribunes that divided are not heard
they had been chosen but that stranger because the terms are ratified and
follow the process and when who speech takes the presidency one of the
first topics you have to order are the commissions that are responsible for
handle different issues like agriculture production mining constitution justice
but a commission is very important the commission of appointment of magistrates
of the constitutional court is a commission specifically for the
appointment has no other purpose but there was an inconvenience that with a
court resolution had generated more benches than the
regulation for the constitution of this commission was achieved
a spokesperson consensus was achieved and the same commission and is appointed by consensus
The number of congressmen for the election of
magistrates or if there is a first consensus already among all the benches
subsequently two weeks later is ratified in full the
commission conformation I mean I didn’t have, I didn’t have any
problem and this is when this fails advance of elections that the executive
suddenly finds another vehicle to try to bend and dominate
legislative power Mr. olachea excuse me for interrupting you has defeated your
time I will give a few minutes I eat the time is but I ask you to be the most
brief possible please then is there coming a
new claim in which it is dictated what should it be the contents of the agenda are already
intervenes in how the agenda and a law is asked to pass
what lights seen could not be refractive which was the modification of article 8
of the of the procedural code of the court
constitutional then it is already rudely you enter within the
outside the parliament that brings us to finally parliament rejects
this and follow your internal procedures how is a voting procedure no
it’s a debate of a law is a procedure and in the afternoon it is taken
project account submitted by the executive and there is the event that gives the
trust that is discussed and voted and is approve is to check if we could improve
Article 8 of the law of court proceedings
constitutional of the republic is in that situation
despite having been approved to five minutes involved in the
congress violently up to date The following cannot attend
congressmen inclusive the constitution of the commission
permanent was under threat e Even the speaker was threatened by
have presented to this court the defense of the future of the congress sir
President I thank you very much and I hope to have
explained the situation a lot thank you very much then we are going to
see the use of the word lie is exactly he is the lawyer of the
permanent commission of the congress lawyer the congress then shows up like this
let’s listen to the explanations routes legal to go against this
measure dictated by the executive branch what is the dissolution of the congress come on
to fight her please there is a problem with the micro
correct continue we question the optional arbitrary exercise one minute
please there is a problem with the micro it’s ok right continue
we question the arbitrary exercise and unconstitutional of the question of
trust and of the faculty of president of the republic to dissolve
The congress because it violates the principle of
separation of powers the autonomy of congress and due process
parliamentary these violations undoubtedly
seriously affect the state of law and the democratic system
the powers of the executive that are arbitrarily exercised are
undermining congress powers two of them important one is to decide
the opportunity in which you will choose the magistrates of the court
constitutional and the second is to choose the procedure by which you will
appoint these magistrates article 201 of the constitution is
of course, when it gives the congress the power to choose
the magistrates by two thirds of the legal number of congressmen and the law
Constitutional Court Organic notes that there are two procedures to
elect the magistrates of the court constitutional these two procedures
we know them well 1 is a procedure ordinary that has a stud stage
and the other is the special procedure with invitation when the congress of the republic took
knowledge that there were six magistrates of this court whose
mandate had expired started the procedure for choosing your
replacements and that was in November of the year 2018
ten months before the president from the council of ministers on the last day
of the last stage of the election will arrive at the congress to ask to be
paralyze that procedure of choice of court magistrates
constitutional that since November of 2018 ten months before it had been decided
it was going to be by invitation which is a procedure provided by law
the resident the council of ministers will submitted and made two demands on 30
September the two requirements are 1 that he will immediately be paralyzed
magistrate election procedure of the constitutional court
that was a claim totally inappropriate and that
it wasn’t even taken into account and the another claim was that a
bill to modify the magistrate election procedure
of the court and eliminate the modality of invitation choice
this second project they were given confidence about the second
project at least to discuss it because this second project had a
transitional provision that assumed that once approved the converted project
in law this would apply retroactively to power at
parliamentary election procedure of magistrates who wanted to paralyze and
we all know that this is unconstitutional article 103 of the
constitution is very clear there are no laws retroactive but it’s also this
claim was also unconstitutional because it was proposed not in reason
of the nature of things but in reason for the difference of those who were going to
apply the law this procedure of invitation choice was bad
result lacking transparency that removed legitimacy from magistrates
that could be chosen that way and that has no logic this
magistrate election procedure by invitation is valid in our
ordination since 1996 was incorporated for the first time in 1996 and five
magistrates of the first court constitutional were chosen by
invitation that procedure was in force between
my to what was in force between 1996 and the
year 2004 and was incorporated




  3. Habiendo tanto que hacer, por todos… los magistrados, los periodistas, los mismos de la comisión del interregno, este señor sigue haciendo el papelón. Que lástima por el tiempo perdido

  4. Un supuesto empresario por herencia, sigue aferrado a las faldas de la sra.k.
    Insiste, porque sabe muy bien de los réditos que les otorga la política corrupta.

  5. La democracia debe salir fortalecido, el golpista Vizcarra debe ser destituido y encarcelado por atentar contra la democracia al no respetar la independencia de poderes, tenemos al pais paralizado, inseguridad galopante, ahuyenta la inversion. No podemos permitir gobernantes como Vizcarra con cualquier pretexto puede interrumpir la democracia es muy mal atencedente esto es retrazo.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *