BUENOS AIRES ( Associated Press) — The conflict between Argentina’s President Alberto Fernandez and the Supreme Court of Justice escalated a step further after the national government protested a decision that allows them to allocate a disproportionate amount of money collected by the city of Buenos Aires. forces to. Treasure.
The president announced on Thursday night that he instructed the competent state bodies to ask the Supreme Court to nullify the proposal that provides that the national government must allocate 2.95% of the amount of federal taxes to the capital.
Fernandez, who has the support of more than a dozen governors from the same political position – Peronism – also ordered Supreme Court magistrates removed from the file after they ruled in favor of the capital’s government. by one of the parties forming the main opposition force.
The president maintains a direct confrontation with the court’s magistrates and believes that Argentina’s justice is biased and in need of reform. At times he has accused the judiciary of favoring the opposition, referring to former President Mauricio Macri (2015–2019).
Fernández believes that the Court’s decision is “political” in view of 2023, when general elections will be held, and is incorrect that it does not harm all provinces of Argentina, as resources for the capital’s government “will come”. “From the national budget, which is implemented in public policies throughout the territory of the nation”.
The Together for Change coalition, the largest opposition force, decried the ruling party’s “continued abuse” of institutions and believed the president’s attitude opens up an “unprecedented institutional and power struggle”.
In the case, which has been pending for two years, four judges of the Supreme Court issued a precautionary measure that ordered the national government to pay 2.95% of the amount of the so-called “shared funds” to the city of Buenos Aires. What amounts to matches outlines a bitter dispute between the two administrations.
The court indicated that the national state should refrain from implementing a 2020 law that establishes the current amounts that the government transfers to the city.
The capital’s government complained about the national executive’s decision to cut funds transferred two years ago following protests by police in Buenos Aires province demanding wage increases.
Constitutionalist lawyers indicated that a precedent was now being opened in which the Court would have to resolve a request to set aside its decision, which it would most likely deny. This would solidify his decision and bind the national government to comply, although he would be able to discuss how he would release the money.