The producers of yerbate achieved a new judicial victory by hearing the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal in Posadas, which confirmed the appeal for protection which stops the articles of the decree of necessity and urgency which took away various faculties from the National Institute of Yerba Mate (INYM)including the setting of reference prices for raw materials.
The triumph of the herbalists is actually a defeat for the national state, which had challenged the appeal for protection issued at the beginning of January by the judge of ordinary jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters 8, Adriana Fiori. The judge decided to suspend all articles that liberalized the herbal market.
Lawyer Adrián Oudín, representing the producers, explained that “Judge Fiori in his resolution suspended the application of the entire chapter of the DNU which took away powers from the INYM. And now it has been ratified by the House. As far as I know, With this the Institute recovers all its powers until the Court’s ruling” on the underlying issue.
For the Institute to return to normality, all that remains is for the national government to appoint the president of the board of directors. The INYM is headless after the resignation of Juan José Szychowski, on December 9 last year; and Jonás Petterson has been the administrative director ever since.
From this ruling, en the Institute analyzes the possibility of requesting a ruling from the National Secretariat of the BioeconomyN. “We will analyze with our legal advisors the scope of this judicial decision to see whether we can request the fixing of reference prices, as established by the law establishing the INYM,” said a representative of the producers.
The resolution of the House It reaches the protections initiated by 20 herbalists belonging to eight different associations. ANDIn their proposal they questioned the articles of DNU 70/2023 because “there is a certain and imminent risk to the right to health of thousands of small herbal producers and their families who are beneficiaries of the Global Health Coverage Agreement celebrated on 20/ 04/22 between the Government of the Province and the INYM, whose payment commitment could not be respected”.
In granting the protection, Fiori argued that “it is clear that if global health coverage of the most vulnerable links in yerba production is 50% funded by the INYM and the effects of the DNU result in the imminent loss of stewardship of the resources of the of the Institute, the interruption of this coverage presents itself as a certain and imminent possibility… and would result in the beneficiaries losing the right of access to medicines, treatments and other health services, within the framework of a socio-economic context that ” it leaves the most vulnerable segment of our rural areas exposed to the inability to meet their most basic needs, which in many cases will have implications for impossible subsequent repairs, ultimately putting their very lives at risk.”
The judge who issued the amparo refused to continue to intervene in the case and entrusted the proceedings to the Federal Justice, where the representative of the national state, lawyer Daniel Eduardo Azar, appealed against the provision. He argued that the ruling undermines “the constitutional powers of the nation’s executive”, that “it is not possible to determine what specific damage is caused or could be caused” by the decree, and also appealed to the validity of the decree in question, which speaks of the “desperate general economic situation” and that delays in the decision-making process would cause “a worsening of the conditions experienced by the country”, and would further affect “an even greater percentage of the population”.
Azar underlined that “the attacked decree is manifestly reasonable, there are reasons of necessity and urgency that motivated its issuance, there is no doubt that the urgency that motivated the provision is the public emergency situation on an economic level , financial, fiscal, administrative and social security issues”, tariff, health and social issues that crosses Argentina and the prevailing need to rebuild its economy”.
According to the lawyer, the suspension of the revocation of the powers of the INYM “brings consequences of impossible subsequent repair because it implies, in fact, that the government plan prepared by the recently installed management is prevented from moving forward to respect the popular will expressed at the polls, in the sense that the Argentine Republic needs a profound and strong change of direction.”
For the waitresses Mirta Delia Tyden, Ana Lía Cáceres de Mengoni and Mario Osvaldo Boldú “no element emerges that can be addressed in the present level of appeal, since the appellant expresses questions that have to do with the underlying issue and not with the case in question analyzed here, nor specifically with the particular situation of the plaintiffs, to which the ENA (State) makes no reference”.
They questioned whether the State did not carry out “the concrete and complete criticism of the reasons presented by the magistrate regarding the suspension of the effects of DNU 70/23 so that the structure, functions and powers of the INYM are not modified or altered. And they underline that “the appellant delves into his reasons only regarding the fact that there were reasons of necessity and urgency that motivated the issuing of DNU 70/23, but does not question the expressed foundations that the a quo had in mind to grant this precautionary measure, therefore, since there is no concrete and reasoned criticism on the issues analyzed by the judge of the level, the complaints are null and void.
Source: Clarin
