Argentina’s President Javier Milei appointed two Supreme Court judges by decree, bypassing Senate approval during its recess, a move criticized as an abuse of power. The appointments are seen as a strategy to fill the judiciary with loyalists, particularly controversial due to one nominee’s allegations of misconduct. Legal experts warn this undermines constitutional norms and judicial independence.
On Tuesday, Argentina’s President Javier Milei appointed two Supreme Court judges through a decree, circumventing the Senate during its recess. This action has drawn criticism as an alleged abuse of executive power. Milei’s office justified the appointments, claiming that the Supreme Court needed to be fully staffed for its operations, stating, “the Supreme Court cannot carry out its normal role with only three justices.”
Milei had nominated Ariel Lijo, a federal judge, and lawyer Manuel García-Mansilla last year, struggling to secure Senate approval due to his coalition’s limited seats. The Senate did not formally reject the nominations; however, the presidential office argued that the Senate’s inaction implied tacit consent, saying that “the Senate chose to remain silent.”
Controversy particularly surrounds Lijo’s nomination, given his history of allegations including conspiracy and ethics violations. This decision surprised many Milei supporters, since he campaigned as an anti-establishment figure aimed at dismantling the political elite in Argentina.
Human Rights Watch condemned the appointments as detrimental to the Supreme Court’s independence, labeling it as “one of the most serious attacks against the independence of the Supreme Court in Argentina since the return of democracy.” The organization emphasized that Milei cannot bypass institutional processes just because he lacks Senate support for his choices.
The appointments are temporary, lasting until November 30, when Lijo and García-Mansilla must seek formal Senate approval. Critics argue this maneuver is an effort by Milei to populate the judiciary with compliant judges. Legal experts have indicated that appointing judges during congressional recesses is constitutionally limited and should not serve as a regular alternative for nominations.
Constitutional lawyer Andrés Gil Domínguez warned that such decrees could endanger constitutional order and the rights of the citizenry by enabling appointments outside established protocols. He asserted, “The decrees are for restrictive use and cannot be used as a mere alternative to the regular procedures provided for by the constitution.”
President Javier Milei’s recent appointment of Supreme Court judges without Senate approval has raised significant concerns regarding executive overreach in Argentina. The actions are seen as an attempt to manipulate judicial appointments to favor loyalists, which experts argue could undermine constitutional norms and democratic principles. Critics, including Human Rights Watch, have denounced the move as harmful to judicial independence, calling for adherence to proper institutional processes in such appointments.
Original Source: www.euronews.com
