ADC holds event to launch report on judge selection process in Argentina
The Association for Civil Rights (ADC) launched the report El problema de la selección de jueces y juezas en la República Argentina (The problem of judge selection in Argentina) through an online event on October 19, with Bernardo Bazet Viñas and Camila Saleme, authors of the document and ADC project assistants, as well as external reviewer Ezequiel Konstenwain as participants.
The meeting, moderated by ADC project leader Marianela Milanes, served as a review of the report, which provides an insight into the Council of the Magistracy, the procedures for appointing magistrates in the Federal and National Justice Courts, and the rules that govern them.
“There was a need to inquire into the Council proceedings and how they are affected by gender issues, given the structural inequality that is deeply rooted in our institutions to this day. As well as by digital technologies, due to their expansion and the potential risks they imply to human rights,” said Bazet Viñas at the event opening.
Our project assistant then specified that the report was centered on the last seventeen judicial recruitment competitions performed before the Council and submitted to the Executive between 2019 and 2021. “This choice had to do with the difficulty in obtaining standardized information from official sources and this imposed limitations in terms of the deadlines established for our study, which at first had foreseen a larger number of cases,” he explained.
Camila Saleme, in turn, focused on the main section of the report, titled “Important Findings,” which compiles issues that stood out over others during the research, such as those related to delays, the establishment of shortlists and the gender perspective.
Regarding the latter, Saleme revealed that the study showed that in none of the seventeen competitions were the gender perspective and the incidence of new technologies evaluated. “This made us wonder if the jurors really have updated knowledge of these matters, as well as in the specific subjects of the competition,” she questioned in closing her intervention.
Finally, attorney Ezequiel Kostenwein, external reviewer to the document, stated: “I consider this report to be a positive contribution because it sheds light on a space that tends to be opaque, like much of the judicial activity. It is a well conceived paper, clearly written and with axes that help the reader understand, even if he or she has no connection with the subject,” he summarized.
