The Supreme Court owes a lot to retirees. This is because it proceeds without a decision in relation to the claims of pensioners and retirees who have favorable decisions a second time and are delayed or “confined” in the Supreme Court, and therefore the sentences are not final.

Luis Herrero, former President of the Social Security Chamber (CFSS), told Clarín that “inexplicable delay by the Supreme Court in deciding on constitutional mobility from a human point of view and very seriously from a legal point of view ”.

Herrero detailed the extraordinary resources that came to the Court and that the High Court did not rule on:

• The extraordinary appeal under the protection of the Ombudsman, requesting that Badaro’s action be applied to a massive sentence on all retirees, entered the Court on May 19, 2009 and the dream of justice is still asleep. On June 12, 2012, five ministers issued a second proposal to better deliver, requesting urgent reports from ANSeS, and the final verdict was never issued (more than 10 years later).

• The exceptional appeal in the case of “Hartman Gabriel” of the Second Chamber (which proved that no retiree could be assessed sentence credit for an amount less than 70% of the updated average of the last 120 salaries), has also not moved since February 14, 2019, when he entered the Court.

• Miguel Fernández Pastor’s appeal against Law 27,426 of 2017, which changed the mobility formula.

(The formula change was made retroactive, at the expense of retirees and between September 2017 and December 2019, increases in pensions and pensions were lower than inflation and reduced the purchasing power of retirees by 19.5%. assets)

• The extraordinary appeal against the “Torterolla, Jorge” decision of Chamber II of the CFSS, in its current composition, which confirmed four unconstitutional decrees of President Fernández of 2020 and suspended the constitutional mobility of Act 27,426 of 2017. entered Court on February 14, 2019 and is still paralyzed (three year delay).

• The cases “Cabrera, Roque” of the Federal Chamber of Paraná and “Caliva, Roberto” of the Federal Chamber of Salta are in a similar situation. (In these cases, the sentences challenged the increases by assignment)

“This unreasonable delay by the Supreme Court in resolving social security cases, limit to the denial of justice, blatantly violates article 25 of the Pact of San José of Costa Rica in terms of speed in issuing sentences and the “100 Brasilia Rules on exceptional judicial protection for persons in situations of vulnerability” (such as retirees and pensioners), approved by the High Court in by Agreement No. 5/2009. “, said Herrero.

YN