Argentina Revokes Citizen Input on Judicial Appointments, Sparking Criticism

Argentina's national government has drawn criticism for its decision to revoke decrees that previously enabled public participation in the appointment process for judges, prosecutors, and Supreme Court ministers. This move is seen by opponents as a significant institutional regression that weakens an essential right and degrades the quality of republican governance. The government's action eliminated a 15-day period during which citizens, universities, professional associations, and civil society organizations could submit observations or challenges regarding candidates before the executive branch finalized its decision and forwarded the nominations to the Senate.

The administration of Javier Milei, through decree 467/2026, also removed the possibility for the Ministry of Justice to solicit specialized opinions. While the government argues that participation is still possible once the nominees reach the Senate, critics contend that this stage is too late. By the time nominations reach the upper house, the candidate already possesses the political backing of the executive branch. The prior instance, they argue, was vital for introducing relevant information, flagging incompatibilities, or highlighting controversial backgrounds before a decision became politically solidified.

Furthermore, articles establishing criteria for gender diversity, specialization, and regional origin in these appointments were also rescinded. The core argument against these revocations is that citizen participation is not a substitute for elected authorities but a mechanism to enhance the quality of public decisions through social scrutiny and power control. Argentina possesses various participatory tools, including popular initiative, public consultations, and public hearings, which are seen as strengthening, not replacing, representative democracy.

Pablo Secchi, executive director of Poder Ciudadano, emphasized the integral nature of citizen participation, stating, "Citizen participation is not a complement to democracy: it is a constitutive part of it. And, in democracy, no one needs permission to exercise it." Transparency and accountability, therefore, are not solely about publishing information after decisions are made but also about maintaining open channels for societal input and oversight, particularly when the state delays or withholds information.