The General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) will not challenge before the Constitutional Court the reform that prevents it from making appointments in office, a situation in which it has been since December 2018 and that makes it maintain a conservative majority composition inherited from the stage in the one that the PP governed with an absolute majority.
The proposal of eight members of the conservative wing to present a conflict of powers with the Parliament has not obtained the majority support of the plenary session, which, meeting this Wednesday in extraordinary session, has knocked it down by 13 votes to eight. The same result has had the vote on the other way of challenge raised by this group of members, who proposed to urge the Ombudsman to file an appeal of unconstitutionality.
The proposals signed by eight of the members proposed in their day by the PP —Ángeles Carmona, Nuria Díaz, Juan Manuel Fernández, Carmen Llombart, Juan Martínez Moya, Rafael Fernández Valverde, José Antonio Ballestero and Gerardo Martínez Tristán— have not counted in this occasion with the support of other members of the CGPJ who, in recent months, did endorse very harsh positions against this reform during its parliamentary process. The president, Carlos Lesmes, has also voted against.
Last January, with the vote in favor of 16 of its 21 members, the CGPJ accused the PSOE and United We Can of breaking the "separation of powers" for expressly taking away powers, since the reform was processed by urgent procedure and with a legislative modality that allows it to be done without seeking the opinion of the advisory bodies.
Both parties - through the Board of Congress, where they have a majority - responded by asking for "respect" for their ability to legislate, which raised the tension between the two branches of state. But, on this occasion, the sector of the CGPJ most critical of this reform has not managed to get enough support to fight in the Constitutional Court.
On April 22, during another plenary session, these same eight members were left alone in voting on another proposal that sought to transfer the debate on this legal reform to Europe. Specifically, they proposed asking the European Network of Justice Councils - a body in which the Councils of the Judiciary or similar institutions of the EU Member States are represented - to examine and rule on the rule, which was precisely the nod from the European Commission last week.