Lawyers group slams Argentine government veto of judge candidate over journalist link

A prominent Argentine legal organization has condemned the government's move to block the promotion of a judicial candidate, arguing it constitutes a direct assault on press freedom.

“

We disapprove of the improper conduct of the National Executive Branch.

Será Justicia, a group of lawyers dedicated to upholding institutions and democracy, published a statement Saturday questioning the executive branch's decision to veto the advancement of María Verónica Michelli. Michelli was a candidate for a federal criminal court judgeship in La Plata. The organization's leadership, including president Inés Arias, called the government's conduct "improper."

The government's objection stems from Michelli's familial ties to Hugo Alconada Mon, a journalist for LA NACION known for his investigations into government officials and finances. Sources indicate that Juan Carlos Pagotto, a senator and chair of the Senate's Agreements Commission, is a key proponent of this objection, maintaining close ties to the presidential secretariat.

“

It is an evident and unacceptable maneuver that not only affects a selection process that has the necessary signatures in the Agreements Commission to become an opinion (nine members representing the necessary majority), but also constitutes a direct attack on freedom of the press and expression, another pillar of our republican system.

Será Justicia emphasized that Michelli's nomination had successfully passed all prior stages, including Senate review and lacking any challenges. The group argued that blocking her nomination, despite having the necessary support within the Agreements Commission, is an "evident and unacceptable maneuver." They further stated that this action undermines the selection process for magistrates and disrespects the constitutional separation of powers.

“

The stance taken by the National Executive Branch not only contradicts the will expressed by the Senate Commission responsible for concluding the process, but also appears to have dubious adherence to the regulatory and transparency norms in the selection of magistrates, as well as due respect for the constitutional system of division of powers.