The controversy over the demonstrations in which the president of the Superior Court of Justice of Castilla y León, José Luis Concepción, compared the PCE with Nazism will reach the Permanent Commission of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), whose vowels will hold in their hand a possible sanction or the definitive shelving To the subject. the association of lawyers Forum of Lawyers and Lawyers of the Left-Network of Lawyers and Democratic Lawyers (FAI-RADE) has appealed against the filing of the proceedings that he issued at the end of last July on Disciplinary Action Promoter, Santiago Senent, that incardinates the manifestations of the magistrate in the “legitimate use of a fundamental right”.
For the complainants, however, the promoter made his decision despite acknowledging a “absolute lack of instruction and any investigative activity” about what happened, so their decision should be reconsidered or at least some diligence carried out to clarify what happened before shelving it definitively. They consider that those competent to make this decision are the members of the Permanent Commission of the governing body of the judges.
Concepción was denounced by the organization of lawyers after expressing a television program that “democracy has been questioned since the Communist Party (…) is part of the government.” In addition, in other public demonstrations it has been showing contrary to Franco’s exhumation and also criticized the Historical Memory Law.
Specifically, it is sought that the members agree to “initiate the appropriate disciplinary file to investigate and sanction, if applicable, for proceeding in this way in Law.” They consider that only the principles of legality and typicality of the magistrate’s conduct and his freedom of expression were valued by the promoter, “without due initiation of disciplinary proceedings (…) and without valuing the principles of neutrality of the institutions and, in particular, the neutrality of the judiciary with respect to democratic parties and their participation in democracy and in the electoral and party system”, as they argue in the appeal to which EL PERIÓDICO DE ESPAÑA, a newspaper belonging to the Prensa Ibérica group as well as this medium.
In the opinion of the appellants, only “from an absolute lack of understanding of journalistic language can the emission of opinions of a ‘free citizen’ be confused (…) carried out within the functions that as part of the judiciary and in relation to the media as such an institution corresponds to it”. They add that Senent’s resolution It also lacks “the appropriate legal motivation, beyond biased jurisprudential citationsbut unrelated to the elements of the sanctioning types it invokes”.
He was asked from his position as a judge
As for the merits of the matter, progressive lawyers insist that Concepciónor was asked “about personal tastes, on gastronomy, on cinematography or on current affairs, legal or not, beyond his charge, but always from his institutional position, so it should be considered as such”.
They add that their words configure “a inadmissible partiality for a state powerboth with respect to another power of the State, such as the executive, and with respect to any citizen who belongs to said party or who shares an ideology” and even the legal entity of the Communist Party itself if it is the case that it has to resolve any matter in the training is involved.
The assertions, furthermore, “show an important lack of transversal democratic training, given that the German national socialist party, when it participated in democratic processes without having outlawed parties, nor having prevented the participation, fundamentally, of the communist and socialist opposition, did not come to power through the ballot box, it should be noted that it is a unacceptable comparison for a democratic country”.
Senent’s decision was the second issued by the CGPJ against sanctioning Concepción. Already in April 2021, the CGPJ Disciplinary Commission refused to initiate a disciplinary file on this magistrate. In its complaint, the lawyers’ forum points out up to four possible behaviors that Concepción would have committed and that they are tclassified as very serious by the Organic Law of the Judiciary (LOPJ)that can lead to suspension, forced transfer and even separation from the race. Among them, the repeated provocation of serious clashes with the authorities of the district in which the judge exercises, or to direct the powers, authorities or public officials or public corporations congratulations or censures for their actions.
After the publication of Concepción’s interview, the member of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) Concepcion Saez, appointed at the proposal of IU, asked the president of the body, Carlos Lesmes, to take “government and disciplinary measures” against Concepción, although this request had no consequences.