The Constitutional Court (CC) declared inadmissible an appeal brought by the Semilla movement against the decision of the First Chamber of the Court of Appeal of the Criminal Chamber, in which it definitively suspended an amparo brought by the political party against the decision of the head of the Seventh Criminal Court of First Instance , Fredy Orellana, on the de-legal personality of the group.
On this subject, the lawyer of the Semilla movement and deputy of the Central American Parliament (Parlacen), Juan Gerardo Guerrero Garnica, assured that the fact that they do not provide protection does not mean that the legal personality of the political group is suspended.
CC refuses to appeal
As the Supreme Court announced, the appeal filed by the Semilla movement through its legal representative Hugo Alfredo Bautista del Cid was declared null and void, thus confirming the decision of the First Chamber of August 24. It decided to stop the processing of the action promoted by the political organization to be permanently suspended.
As the Constitutional Court explained, the approach taken is not correct because “if the final budget is not exhausted, Article 19 of the Amparo Law, personal issuance and constitutionality, provides for the obligation that the applicant must exhaust” , before submission of Amparo, the resources provided for in the legislation regulating the act claimed.”
This decision was justified for reasons of legal certainty, since the Amparo cannot be constituted as a substitute procedural means for ordinary administrative or judicial means due to its “subsidiary and exceptional” character, the Supreme Court explained.
In this sense, he explained that Semilla went directly to Judge Orellana to seek protection, which is why he did not stick to the final procedural budget because the party could file an appeal for reconsideration.
“This would be ideal to challenge the decision by which the performance judge did not allow the challenge initiated to be processed; since the assumptions established in Article 402 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are satisfied in the sense that the decision was issued without a prior hearing and cannot be challenged by appeal,” the CC added.
SEMILLA SAYS RESOURCES STILL PENDING
On this subject, Semilla made a statement in which he recalled that he had been informed by the Supreme Court of protection 2279-2023, ultimately allowing a lawsuit promoted by the group in which he decided to protect the After According to the principle of change in the exercise of office, the distribution of offices and the assumption of elected authorities must be guaranteed.
From this report, the party stated that it was informed of the judgments of appeals 5004-2023 and 5146-2023, which requested the suspension of the orders issued by Judge Orellana, in which he also rejected the man’s challenge as the one in the Motion for reconsideration filed in court docket 10179-2023-00231.
For this reason, he stressed that there are still pending constitutional lawsuits and appeals to be decided on the illegal and arbitrary order by Orellana to revoke the legal personality of Semilla, which exploits the law against organized crime to commit legal fraud. in some way flawed, anomalous and dangerous.
“Movimiento Semilla continues to enjoy the protection enshrined in the Electoral and Political Parties Law (LEPP) and its legal personality remains registered and current,” he emphasized.
In addition, he stressed that the protection of the Supreme Court ultimately maintains the current legal nature of the electoral process, thus guaranteeing that the will of the people of Guatemala is respected in the conditions in which they elected their authorities.
NOTES THAT ERROR IS NOT A PART OF THE PROCEDURE
Likewise, Semilla condemned the leak of the resolutions of the member of the Foundation Against Terrorism, Raúl Falla, who, he emphasized, is not a party to the proceedings in the Amparo lawsuits decided by the Supreme Court.
“He had access to this resolution before they officially notified us as a party and the biased interpretations they make on social networks, thereby maliciously surprising people,” the statement said.
In the letter, Semilla also calls on Guatemalan citizens to monitor the actions of the judicial authorities, as the will of the people must be respected by the Guatemalan state.
GUERRERO SAYS THIS DOES NOT MEAN THE PARTY IS SUSPENDED
On this subject, lawyer Guerrero Garnica mentioned to La Hora that Raúl Falla, member of the Foundation Against Terrorism, had assured on social networks that the party’s legal personality had been terminated because an appeal had not been upheld.
“The information is completely false and distorted. The fact that they do not grant an amparo or do not submit a request for an amparo does not mean that they abolish the legal personality of the party, as Raúl Falla suggests,” he stressed.
In addition, Guerrero Garnica questioned the manner in which Falla would have obtained the information, since at the time of the lawyer’s conversation with La Hora, the political party had not yet been informed of the Supreme Court’s decision.
At the same time, Andrea Reyes, elected representative in the Congress of the Republic and party lawyer, also pointed out that the information leaked by the Anti-Terrorism Foundation was false.
https://twitter.com/drewzecena/status/1704270498228555977?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
“In both amparos, the legal personality of the party was not discussed. But two procedural appeals were rejected. “The Semilla movement is still valid,” said the lawyer.
THE CASE
The lawsuits are based on the decision of Judge Orellana on the suspension of the Semilla movement, at the request of the Special Prosecutor against Impunity (FECI), in charge of Rafael Curruchiche, in the context of what he called the “Semilla corruption” case for the defendants signature forgery incorrect.
This resolution was announced an hour before the Supreme Electoral Court (TSE) officially announced the results of the parliamentary elections and scheduled a second round of elections between Sandra Torres of the National Unity of Hope (UNE) and Bernardo Arévalo of Semilla. This created a climate of uncertainty regarding the electoral process and the party’s future, leading the organization to attempt to shelve Orellana’s decision.
