Congress dissolution
- 1. FACULTAD DE DERECHO Y CIENCIA POLÍTICA ESCUELA ACADEMICO PROFESIONAL DE DERECHO “La Disolución del Congreso” Profesora : Rodas Paredes,Misela Curso : Ingles I Integrantes : Pérez Campos,Dante Sergio Diaz Aburto, José Manuel Pingus Jara, Rovinson Ciclo : IV Aula : 408 Sección : 03 2019
- 2. pág. 2 Introduction Where was the dissolution of this political event? When was the dissolution of the congress? Why did this happen? Who was the one who dissolved the congress? How often does this happen? And what will happen and its possible consequences? All these questions will have their answers in this essay, since we all live in this country, we buy things (for our subsistence), we drink water because we are human beings, we eat healthy and unhealthy food, we study at the university, we all have You understand this to be able to analyze it and in the end teach it to other people. This is an essay on a case that happens on the national reality and it will be addressed using it using the grammar rules of English together with unit 3 of the syllabus.
- 3. pág. 3 Desarrollo This last thursday, the president of the permanent commission, Pedro Olaechea, filed with the Constitutional Court an appeal that requires the return of Parliament after its dissolution. The demand, which is technically called “competition action,” seeks to declare the decree issued by the Government of Martín Vizcarra unconstitutional, which formalized the partial closure of the Legislature and the call for new congressional elections. A few days before, Marisol Espinoza y Ángel Neyra, two former members of the dissolved Congress of the Republic, processed their respective amparo demands before the Judicial power with the same purpose of reversing the provision and being reassigned as legislators. While these resources would run against time, as the election of a new Congress is already scheduled for January 26, 2020, they would also face other obstacles of form and substance to prosper. This was explained by three constitutionalists consulted by RPP News.
- 4. pág. 4 1. Is admitting the competence demand at the will of the Constitutional Court? On the possibility that the Constitutional Court attends the competition action there is a specialized controversy. Some law analysts point out that it should not be admitted because the Constitutional Procedural Code in its article 109, paragraph 3 establishes that these demands need to have the support of the collegiate institution as a whole, which in this case would be the deactivated Plenary Session of the Congress. For the Master in Constitutional Law Erika García Cobián Castro, the origin of the competence demand “would be subject to debate” and, even if admitted, would have little chance of prospering. “There is the discussion of whether to admit it or not because, strictly speaking, the Permanent Commission does not have the power to, on its own, authorize the start of a competence process. Then there is the underlying issue, which isto analyze whether the dissolution was constitutional. If it is concluded that yes, consequently the demand would be declared unfounded”. The constitutionalist and Doctor of Law Luis Castillo Córdova argues that, although the admissibility of the competition action has rigid rules, the Constitutional Court could make an exception. “Here it will depend on what consideration the Constitutional Court has: If it becomes very strict, it will reject it flatly. If, on the contrary, he believes that the situation merits his pronouncement, he will interpret that the Permanent Commission is a substitute for Parliament and will admit it. That interpretation, from the legal point of view, would be very stretched, very forced, but these are not normal times and the Court may end up admitting it, which is not the same as declaring it founded because that is later”.
- 5. pág. 5 On the other hand, Violeta Bermúdez Valdivia, master in Constitutional Law, indicates that a regulatory vacuum such as the one that exists (in which the Permanent Commissionof a Congress dissolved is not allowed to present competing actions) cannot take the Constitutional Court to flatly reject such a particular case. “I believe that, in every democratic State of Law, there must always be the opportunity to review a decision as transcendent as the dissolution of a Congress. We should not reach the absurdity of a power taking a position and nobody can question it because we prefer to be formalists. Rather, we should bet that the most competent body, which is the Constitutional Court, be pronounced - unfavorably or unfavorably, but settling. If we were formalists, we would also say that there was no concrete communication of the denial of trust and that, therefore, the conditions required for dissolution were not met, when there are points on both sidesthat can be evaluated”. Bermúdez expresses that, in this specific scenario, “the norm has fallen short” and believes that this controversy should merit a future modification that gives the Permanent Commission an objection when the Congress is dissolved. The competence demand is, as a rule, an appeal that is filed before the Constitutional Court in order for it to define whether or not a defendant body or power exceeded its constitutional powers after a certain act. 2. Amparo and its (few) possibilities
- 6. pág. 6 the former legislators Marisol Espinoza and Ángel Neyra already resorted to the ordinary justice for the suitor his replacement as parliamentarians. According to the content of Neyra's demand, the modification was "unconstitutional" and affected the rights to political participation and the work of congressmen by a "unconstitutional" cut of their mandates. Consulted by this means, the former president of the Constitutional Court César Landa Arroyo explained that every person can file an amparo demand if he considers that his constitutional rights have been violated. However, he clarified that there are no "absolute rights", so not all protection is always appropriate. “The rights can be limited or suspended by law when it has a constitutionally legitimate purpose and the restriction is reasonable and proportional. According to article 134 of the Constitution which empowers the president to dissolve Congress after two denials of trust, the right of congressmen who are elected to fulfill a mandate can be legitimately affected”. For Violeta Bermúdez, an amparo demand for violation of rights would not have room for discussion in this case. “It would be inadmissible. From the constitutional point of view, there is no absolute right to be a congressman. And, in the aspect of the right to political participation, its exercise has rules and possibilities. Article 5, first paragraph, of the Constitutional Procedural Code would be applied, which states that they do not proceed when the facts are not directly referred to the constitutionally protected content of the right invoked. The dissolved congressmen have exercised and participated, but that participation has other elements around, such as
- 7. pág. 7 suspension, sanction, lawlessness and these are rules that are known when applying. Another of the assumptions that are known is that of dissolution as a presidential faculty in a given scenario”. The specialist also states that it could not be claimed that the damage was personal. "The dissolution did not directly serve to affect a certain congressman." Marisol Espinoza and Ángel Neyra filed their amparo demand before constitutional courts of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima. Castillo Córdova agrees in the reading: “Yes, Indeed there was a cut in the congress period and this limited the expectations of the congressmen. However, a limitation like this is not, in principle, unconstitutional because the previous act was carried out invoking the Constitution. In any case, that previous act that of the post-interpretation dissolution of the second denial of trust would have to be identified and qualified as unconstitutional so that we can only consider that an aggression against the fundamental rights of the congressmen was configured.” It should be noted that the demand for amparo is a very personal resource. This means that a possible favorable ruling could only benefit the plaintiff who won the process. Therefore, a hypothetical replacement would only be applied to Espinoza, Neyra or both, but it could not be immediately extended to the group of dissolved congressmen. “The amparo has effects for each individual case. If one were declared founded, it could generate a sort of constitutional jurisprudence that would intervene in other possible cases, but it is not that there is an immediate automatic
- 8. pág. 8 application for all similar cases without individual demand involved”, explains García Cobián Castro. Another detail to consider is that the amparo process, like any judicial process, becomes firm when it exhausts, at least, the two judicial instances. Before a double rejection of the claim, the plaintiff can insist via Constitutional Court, with a grievance appeal. Everything would lead to evaluate (first) the constitutionality of the dissolution. While the procedures of each appeal are carried out in parallel, some of the specialists consulted report that it would be convenient for the constitutional judges of the Court of Lima - since it received the amparo demands - await a pronouncement of the maximum entity of constitutional interpretation, which is the TC. This, if it comes to admit, analyze and resolve the competence action presented by Olaechea. “From my point of view, it would be pointless to resolve an amparo if, in addition, a competing demand has been filed. What, in any case, is questioned is whether the dissolution was framed in the Constitution. And that is a debate that has a more institutional background than individual”, believes the constitutionalist Violeta Bermúdez Valdivia.
- 9. pág. 9 According to the lawyer Luis Castillo Córdova, if the competence demand is admitted for processing, it is convenient that the Judiciary be kept to the expectation. “Yes, it can be considered a practical convenience to suspend the amparo process pending the decision of the TC. But as long as that does not happen, the constitutional judge should focus on knowing the amparos presented.” Conclusions We already know that the dissolution of the congress took place in the country of Peru, this event took place on September 30, 2019, it had to happen to end corruption, this dissolution was made by the president of the republic Martin Vizcarra Cornejo, this It is the first time that has happened in our country, we already know that the future will bring us new congressional elections (new congressmen) and this will possibly have an impact on the economy, but on a macroeconomic scale. Knowing this we can already understand everything about the dissolution of the congress, and in the first part we can be calm since according to the analysts this was given according to the political constitution of Peru, it already depends on the dissolved congressmen to accept it and also on We will go to the polls on January 26 next year. Understanding this essay is to clarify the use at all times of the grammatical rules of English and also the use of unit 3 of the English syllabus as we find a work of that size.