THE pension moratorium procedures They have opened a controversy, which has already reached Justice.
It is because the ANSeS, in Circular FP 22/23 of 8 May, established that the moratorium forms must be signed by those requesting the benefit in the delegation of ANSeS (UDAI)”not being valid all those other than those issued by the systems, i.e that are signed and certified, outside the scope of said UDAI”.
From this requirement (that the application must be signed by the titular applicant and cannot be replaced by the lawyer) the lawyer Verónica Barcarolo interpreted that it prevented her from fully acting as prosecutor and filed an interlocutory appeal in court.
Based on a number of reasons, Federal Court No. 2 of Santa Fe granted the requested precautionary measure. And he ordered the ANSeS to suspend the application of the circular as soon as it provides in its first part “…individually signed by the owner…”, and in the last paragraph: “…requires the applicant’s signature…”.
Consequently, he also condemned the lawyer Barcarolo is enabled in their presentations to ANSES to delegate the elderly, asking for the acceptance of the Pension Debt Plan foreseen by Law 27.705…”.
Among other things, the Court stated that “with the issuance of this Circular, ANSES, on the one hand, could manifestly abandon without protection to the passive class and to the people who with this new Law n. in person and alone, I could put them in one state of helplessness and total uncertainty, since they watch unable to access professional advice probos on the subject, which helps them to fully understand the scope of the documentation they sign”.
They told ANSeS clarion that there is nothing in the Circular that undermines the constitutional rights of lawyers or that could be interpreted as an obstacle to their right to work.
They also indicated that “as clear from the court’s decision, the plaintiff does not prove that she was barred from bringing proceedings as prosecutor, but rather bases her claim on an interpretation of the text of the circular.” And they concluded: “Lawyers have every right to work but we always remember this the process is simple, free and does not require intermediaries”.
Source: Clarin
