Uncertainties in Argentina's Judiciary as Judge Reaches Age Limit

Argentine judge Martín Irurzun, known for his strong stance against political corruption, finds himself in a judicial limbo as he has reached the constitutional age limit of 75 for judges. This age limit was established during the 1994 constitutional reform, a departure from previous practices where judges could serve much longer, as seen with former Supreme Court Justice Carlos Fayt, who served until age 98.

The situation is complicated by two contradictory Supreme Court precedents. The first, from 1999 in the "Fayt case," declared the age limit unconstitutional, arguing that the amendment was added without full congressional approval. However, a later ruling in 2017, the "Schiffrin case," reversed this, granting the Constituent Assembly more autonomy to add such provisions. This leaves the Constitution with conflicting articles: Article 99, Clause 4, setting the 75-year limit, and Article 110, ensuring judicial tenure as long as conduct remains good.

Legal experts note that Carlos Rosenkrantz, a current Supreme Court justice who advised on the 1994 reform, voted in favor of the "Fayt case" ruling. However, other current justices, including the Court's president Horacio Rosatti and Juan Carlos Maqueda, have been involved in the subsequent decisions that altered the jurisprudence. This legal ambiguity casts a shadow over the future of judges like Irurzun and raises questions about the stability and clarity of Argentina's judicial system.