Days pass, months pass, years pass and the Supreme Court continues without saying in relation to trials with second degree sentences in favor of pensioners and pensioners challenged by ANSeS. And therefore the sentences are not final and they “sleep” on the Justice computers. The Court has no deadlines to rule, even if it concerns elderly people. .
Luis Herrero, former president of the Chamber of Social Security (CFSS), said this. Clarion that “the delay of the Court of Cassation in ruling on constitutional mobility is inexplicable from a human point of view and very serious from a legal point of view. The dismissal of pension cases in the Court of Cassation always damages the weaker party who resorts to Justice to protect his right and benefit the party who violates it”.
Herrero added that “the Supreme Court seems having forgotten the conventional guarantee the relevance of the sentences. The lack of definition in the cases “Quiroga, Carlos” -PBU- “García Norma” -income tax- “Blanco, Lucio” -updating index of the last 120 salaries- among others- is clear proof of this.”
Some of the extraordinary resources received by the Court and on which the High Court has not ruled are:
• The extraordinary appeal has entered the Court under the protection of the Ombudsman who requested that Badaro’s mobility be applied to all pensioners with a massive sentence May 19, 2009 and he still sleeps the sleep of the righteous. On 12 June 2012 the five ministers issued a second provision to better provide, requesting urgent reports from ANSeS, and the final sentence was never issued (more than 12 years have passed).
• Even the extraordinary appeal in the “Hartman Gabriel” case of Section II, which established that no pensioner can have a sentence lower than 70% of the updated average of the last 120 wages), was not followed up. February 14, 2019, when he entered the Court.
• Miguel Fernández Pastor’s appeal against law 27.426 of 2017, which modified the mobility formula. The change in formula was made retroactively, to the detriment of pensioners. 14.5% corresponded to the March 2018 disbursement and 5.71% was granted. and between September 2017 and December 2019, retirements and pensions They had a worsening of 19.5%.
• The extraordinary appeal against the “Torterolla, Jorge” ruling of Section II of the CFSS has entered the Court, in its current integration, which confirmed the four unconstitutional decrees of President Fernández of 2020 and suspended the constitutional mobility of law 27.426 of 2017 . on February 14, 2019 and is still paralyzed (five years late).
• 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 provided for by Alberto Fernández’s 2020 decree. .
For his part, lawyer Guillermo Jauregui underlined that “the relevant pension issues are awaiting resolution at the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation”. To those already mentioned, the specialist adds that the Court will have to “define the universal basic benefit update index (PBU).
Meanwhile, Herrero underlined that “the San José Pact of Costa Rica obliges the states that signed it – including the Argentine Republic – issue sentences within a “reasonable time”. The Supreme Court itself underlined in the case “Enderle José v. ANSES” that “the defense in court includes the right to obtain a rapid decision, within a reasonable time, since an unjustified delay could imply that the rights could be left indefinitely without the its due application to the grave detriment of those who invoke it.” According to the Brasilia Rules on access to justice for people in vulnerable conditions – approved with Decision No. 5 of the High Court – the delay in issuing a sentence it is significantly aggravated when the rights of older people are violated.
“The delay in resolving these matters and the resulting uncertainty about how they will be resolved causes great harm to all defendants because they may risk filing lawsuits that do not contribute to overburdening the judiciary to decide these matters,” Guillermo added. Jauregui.
Source: Clarin
