The Crime Chamber confirmed today the rejection of the preventive habeas corpus presented yesterday against the anti-picket protocol from the Minister of Security, Patricia Bullrich.
The judges ratified what the first instance magistrate had ordered and rejected “in limine” (without processing) the appeals of the representatives of the Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS), Adolfo Pérez Esquivel and Néstor Pitrola.
The ruling bears the signatures of the chambermaids Marcelo Lucini (who is the judge that the government announced that it will propose as a candidate for attorney), Ignacio Rodríguez Varela (who was for many years secretary of the prosecutor José María Campagnoli and during the Kirchnerism he won several contests to be judge, but they never elected him) and Hernán Martín López.
They said that there are “no current limitations, restrictions or threats to people’s freedom” and that it must be taken into account that rights are subject to “reasonable and fair limitations.”
According to the Chamber, the protocol “is limited to reproducing or neither more nor less than emphasizing what is related to the power – and duty – of the security forces to act ex officio in the presence of a crime of public action.” They stressed that habeas corpus is not a mechanism to guarantee the freedom “of those who could be accused of committing a crime” and maintained that the protocol does not alter what is provided for by the Penal Code or by the rules that establish which behaviors are contraventions.
The protocol dictated by Bullrich establishes that federal police and security forces “will intervene in the face of impediments to the transit of people or means of transportation, partial or total cuts to national routes and other circulation routes.” It expressly provides that it will be enough for the width of the street to be reduced and that the fact that there are alternative routes to traffic does not change the situation.
The basis is that the crime of article 194 of the Penal Code would be being committed, which punishes anyone who “prevents, hinders or hinders the normal functioning” of transportation. The protocol only applies in areas of national jurisdiction (such as train stations, national routes, federal buildings), which is why it does not apply on the streets of Buenos Aires. The City did not adhere to the national protocol, but the local Ministry of Security announced this Tuesday a series of “mandatory compliance” provisions for carrying out mobilizations in the city. It established that it will not be possible to “interrupt vehicular traffic” (a more flexible formula than that of the Bullrich protocol), “participate with the face covered in an intimidating manner” or use “sticks or blunt elements.” In addition, it prohibited the presence of “children in the marches” on the grounds that “they have to be at home or at school” and that mobilizing them “violates their rights.”
I like this:
I like Loading…
