The Constitutional considers that the Basque Parliament limited the rights of Vox to participate in the Chamber

While going on to preside over the regional chamber in

, Vox achieved another more modest victory in the

.

The Constitutional Court has estimated this Friday the appeal for protection of the formation against two decisions that, according to the court, limited their right to political participation.

The estimated appeal - with the contrary vote of four magistrates - focused on the refusal to allow the Mixed Group to be called the Mixed-Vox Group and that it was going to be the only one of the groups with limited initiatives and shortened intervention time .

As for the name, the sentence written by Judge

explains that the chamber's own regulations give the Mixed Group the power to self-organize, which must include decisions such as the name of the group.

And even more so when it is made up of a single parliamentarian.

He adds that the Basque Parliament has also acted in the opposite direction to what it had been doing, because in previous legislatures the Mixed Group was allowed to have the name of the political formation to which its only member belonged. It even had several names, depending on the various political formations to which its members belonged.

full blank

The other limitations appealed meant that the Mixed Group -in short, the Vox Mixed Group- could only present one initiative every three ordinary plenary sessions and that the time of intervention in the debates was only a third of that corresponding to the rest of the groups.

In addition, it had as a limit an interpellation and four oral questions every three plenary sessions of control to the Autonomous Government.

With the support in this case of the TC Prosecutor's Office, the majority of the court considers that the Chamber's regulations establish a regime of equality for all parliamentary groups, without any distinction between them.

It provides for a regime of participation of the Mixed Group "identical" to that of the rest of the groups and with "the same duration" of the interventions.

The sentence underlines that the limitations imply that in two out of three plenary sessions "the exercise of the most genuine parliamentary functions is prevented, such as those of initiatives (proposals of law or not of law, motions) and those of control to the Government" , something that affects the "essential core" of the task of the Vox parliamentarian.

particular votes

There is a third point in which the TC does not agree with the appellant parliamentarian.

The magistrates consider the limitations on the number of attendees of the parliamentary group to be acceptable.

On this occasion, the regulation does accept that it be proportional to representativeness.

,

,

,

and

, have voted in favor of estimating most of the appeal

.

The sentence has the private vote of

,

,

and

, who consider that the appeal should have been dismissed in its entirety.

Conforms to The Trust Project criteria

Know more

See links of interest

• war ukraine direct

• Last News

• time change

• Best schools Spain

• Translator

• Topics

• Work calendar 2022

• events

• How to do

• Seville - West Ham United

• Asvel Villeurbanne - Bitci Baskonia

• Real Madrid - Olympia Milan

• Barcelona - Galatasaray

• Zalgiris Kaunas-Barça