Lima, October 20, 2010
Ramírez Carlos Mesia
President of the Constitutional Court of Peru
Lord Messiah:
I have read your release published today on the website of the Constitutional Court, in which answers some questions made by the Institute of Defense Legal (IDL). After reflecting on his position, I decided to write a short letter is not intended that you read it, much less bother to answer, but with the sole purpose of saying what I think and feel that has left me with attitude, not only now but for several years, a view which is based in my capacity as a citizen and expressed in the exercise of my constitutional rights.
First Lord Messiah, I must say that I share with many of the legal criteria nor with what he thinks of the Court presiding. For example, I do not think a penalty of $ 36 million would affect the right to property This was an argument for invalidating his award. I do not think it can be argued that judicial decisions that deviate from precedents of the Court are null and void, because such invalidity shall not exist in public law.
Fewer still believe it is legally correct to argue that the precedent of mandatory binding on judges to the point that they have no chance to depart, as there is the figure of Distinguishing , which is part of the theory of stare decisis which was incorporated in the Code of the Constitution. Also, I think you are wrong in a serious way when both constitutional norms unknown as infra to assert the will of the Tribunal, as is the case of this law that the Court should be pronounced only in respect of the decisions rejecting the habeas corpus, amparo, habeas data and compliance and not of estimatory . I totally disagree when you said that the Court's judgments are equivalent to the Constitution because concretize its precepts, this implies a destruction of the sources in Peru. Nor, Mr Mesia, I think it is appropriate that the Tribunal is engaged in interpreting wills, since this is the work of the jurisdiction (the real), and fewer still to ignore the res judicata, noting that procedural issues are Finding no merit to the school that includes you. Lord Messiah, the jeopardy is a constitutional principle. Do not forget it.
Similarly, I disagree strongly with you in the role to be assumed by the Constitutional Court in our legal system. You have said, very loose bones, which the Court directs economic policy, health, social ( Act, No. 30). This is reflected in the judgments on the morning after pill, first, and the tariff on cement, then both with their vote counting. This reflects that you are consistent with what he says and does. Personally, I would congratulate this attitude because not many people have, but I think this is a wrong approach and harmful to our rule of law. If the Constitutional Court decides on government policy, what is the role of the executive branch, Mr. Messiah? Could it be that, on the grounds of protection of fundamental rights, the Collegiate will be performing functions that is not theirs? Unfortunately, It occurs when an organ skills that do not belong, which creates a lack of distortion that must be repaired.
But the Court over which you preside is the final word in almost all disputes that arise when product nor its constituent power, the Constitution, entrusted that mission. The Court must represent a balance, not imbalance, should promote the order, not chaos. Lord Messiah, I can state unequivocally that the Court is on the verge of a coup, if you have not already given. This is the result of thinking like you do.
Finally, you may disagree with everything I have been saying so far. What surprised me and reveal otherwise you would not have played well the charge was granted. However, I do not think the solution to defend his person is the press release published today on page Constitutional Court's web. His descriptions are unconscionable and excessive unworthy of his office and are not consistent with a discussion of height, even when you perceive that the criticisms are excessive. Ad hominem arguments abound and only reflect an alarming level of arrogance and little tolerance for criticism. Professionals to brand IDL "parrots" that have an "intellectual mediocrity" or that nature has given them intelligence, or even say that there are professional enough to train judges and prosecutors, are absolutely unacceptable phrases. You say that "criticism is welcome as long as they do with decency, respect and above all, intelligence, but curiously you are the first not to do so. As for the forms, it is evident that his statement is very far from the IDL statement was the cause, and that's unfortunate.
I know it's too much to ask to change your way of thinking and acting. However, I think so I am allowed to ask for his duties as a judge of the Constitutional Court falls short of the circumstances and no longer continue to deepen the schism that has developed in the legal system. Although I have my own idea of \u200b\u200bwhat should be the future of their school (limited to constitutional and jurisdictional processes and nothing more), until the desired time is only may ask for peace and quiet.
remain, goodbye to you
Renzo Cavani Brain
0 comments:
Post a Comment