Oscar Urviola notes that it may take two to three months for the TC to allow the interpretation requested by Congress.

Oscar Urviolaformer President of the Constitutional Court (CC), said on Tuesday that this body could take two to three months to respond to the request Congress interpret Article 117 of the Constitution in such a way as to allow constitutional prosecution of the President Peter’s castlewithin the framework of the application for initiation of a criminal case, filed prosecutor’s office.

As explained Air-night edition rotor RPP news, Constitutional Procedure Code states that this procedure requires that the TC recognize the claim of jurisdiction and expansion presented by Congress and then notify those who have been called, in this case the judiciary, in order to hear the case and make a decision.

“Once the claim is filed and qualified, that with this extension, the TC will have to (…) take it into consideration and pass it on to the SP and those who were called (…) with a response, a hearing should be scheduled and then (there is) 30 days for a decision, so we are practically, as it happens in the processes of unconstitutionality, more or less within the time limit, let’s say the closest could be two to three months,” he said.

Litigation and possible solution

The former head of the TC clarified that Congress of the Republic did not consult a higher interpreter Constitutionbut made an extension of the competency claim filed on October 10 against the amparo, in which he was asked to relinquish his supervisory function.

He also pointed out that with this expansion, the Legislative Assembly required the interpretation of Article 117 of the Magna Carta to define the crimes committed by the President of the Republic during his term and punish them. He added that there is jurisprudence in this regard to “enforce constitutional mandates”.

“Case law has established, for example, the well-known extraordinary constitutional remedy for tort, allowing (not to leave) with impunity such crimes as money laundering, drug trafficking, terrorism, when public service he could not appeal against the rulings which, in the second degree, released the persons involved in these crimes. There is a story, indeed, and in this case protected by Article 8 of the Constitution, which establishes … drug trafficking and everything related to these serious crimes, ”he said.

In the same vein, he argued that the TC could conduct a “systematic interpretation” Constitution, with a history of these situations that are not provided for by law and jeopardize the fight against corruption and money laundering. Therefore, according to him, the body can interpret the commission of crimes by the president as a criminal organization, as indicated in the complaint filed by the prosecutor’s office, according to the background.

“It may be (that he interprets it this way) in the light of a systematic interpretation of both the Constitution itself, which does not allow for corruption, and in the light of international conventions and treaties, such as Article 30 United Nations Convention to which the national prosecutor referred,” he said.