UN Expert Raises Alarms Over Argentina’s Supreme Court Appointments Via Decree

A UN expert has condemned President Javier Milei’s use of presidential decrees to appoint justices to Argentina’s Supreme Court, arguing this undermines judicial independence, democracy, and gender equality. The lack of women in the court raises inclusivity concerns, while criticism mounts over democratic principles being potentially violated. The constitutional process for such appointments is being disregarded.

On Wednesday, a UN expert expressed grave concerns regarding the judicial appointments made by Argentine President Javier Milei through a presidential decree. Margaret Satterthwaite, the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, asserted that this action could jeopardize Argentina’s judicial independence, democratic principles, and gender equality. She emphasized that the Executive should operate within the confines of the law.

Satterthwaite criticized the potential consequences of increased executive power over judicial appointments, warning that such practices could diminish transparency, compromise the separation of powers, and threaten judicial tenure security. She articulated: “By ignoring judicial appointment processes established in the Constitution and clarified in statute, the President is evading legally-established checks and balances.”

The appointment has also raised significant gender equality concerns, as there will be no women justices in the Supreme Court following these changes. Satterthwaite regarded this development as “a step back for the country,” arguing that the lack of representation could undermine the legitimacy of judicial institutions and erode public trust, thus violating gender equality norms.

On February 26, the Milei administration enacted a decree to appoint a federal judge and a legal scholar as justices of the Supreme Court. This move followed Milei’s failure to secure a two-thirds majority in the Senate for traditional nominations. The President remarked that the Senate had “chosen to remain silent” regarding his nominees, whose qualifications he claims were demonstrable.

This decision has provoked widespread criticism from both national and international human rights organizations. Juanita Goebertus, the Americas Director at Human Rights Watch, characterized the appointments as “one of the most serious attacks on the independence of the Supreme Court in Argentina since the country’s return to democracy,” highlighting that Milei cannot disregard institutional mechanisms.

The Argentine Constitution mandates that Supreme Court candidates must be nominated by the president and approved by the Senate, ensuring that judicial appointments comply with checks and balances inherent in rule of law. Although the constitution allows the president to fill positions requiring Senate approval during congressional recess, the application of this provision to Supreme Court justices remains unclear, raising questions about whether such appointments fit the definition of “employment vacancies” typically used for other executive roles.

As a signatory to both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the American Convention on Human Rights, Argentina is bound to protect its judicial independence and impartiality by enforcing an appropriate appointment process free from political interference.

In summary, the recent appointments to the Argentine Supreme Court via presidential decree have raised substantial concerns regarding judicial independence, democratic integrity, and gender representation. UN expert Margaret Satterthwaite criticized these actions for circumventing established legal processes and expressed fears over the erosion of trust in judicial institutions. The controversy surrounding these appointments illustrates the importance of adhering to constitutional mandates and maintaining checks and balances in governance. Argentina’s obligations under international agreements further emphasize the need for an impartial judicial appointment process.

Original Source: www.jurist.org