Judges and prosecutors stand up to Bolaños, who refuses to withdraw his reforms.

The challenge appears to be coming true in the form of the sixth strike by judges in this democracy, with the public prosecutor's office joining in this time. As a prelude to this three-day strike, today they are gathering outside the Supreme Court, a symbol of the highest institution of justice.

The organizers are five of the seven judges' and prosecutors' associations, all except the two progressive ones. The reason for the strike is their opposition to the two justice reforms announced by Justice Minister Félix Bolaños. The organizers insist that it is a strike for the dignity of the profession and that it has nothing to do with politics.

However, underlying the situation is the growing weariness of accusations by the government and parties supporting the executive branch of "lawfare" and the attacks, as they see it, on judicial independence. The president of the Supreme Court and the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ), Isabel Perelló, has already had to issue several warnings to curb attacks on judges handling controversial cases.

Tensions between the judiciary and the executive branch have been escalating recently, with the Amnesty Law for the independence process also causing a stir, as it is seen as an attack on the separation of powers.

Read also

Judges and prosecutors are up in arms because they see an attempt by the executive branch, using the legislative branch as an instrument, to control the judiciary. That's why they're also striking for reform of the statute of the Public Prosecutor's Office, to pave the way for granting investigative powers to prosecutors. They believe this cannot be done until the appointment of the Attorney General is separated from the government. In their view, this reform has been a missed opportunity to meet Europe's demands for greater independence for the Prosecutor's Office.

Bolaños promoted a reform to facilitate access to the judicial and prosecutorial professions, expanding scholarships, modifying types of exams, extending the fourth shift, restricting the use of opposition coaches, limiting funding for associations, and, above all, consolidating the position of all those law graduates who act as substitute judges without having passed the competitive examination.

The Supreme as a symbol

Bolaños has already announced that the reforms will not be halted or withdrawn. He will remain vigilant until the final outcome. He will try to curb the image expected tomorrow of the judges planted in the Supreme Court. "This first public action will take place in a deeply symbolic and institutional location. This is not a protest against any branch of government, but rather a civic demonstration intended to highlight the essential role of the judiciary in guaranteeing fundamental rights and judicial independence," the organizers say.

They chose the Supreme Court for its institutional significance: "It is the place where candidates complete their path to public service, after years of effort based on the principles of merit, ability, and equality."

The organizers—the Professional Association of the Judiciary (APM), the Francisco de Vitoria Judicial Association (AJFV), the Independent Judicial Forum (FJI), the Association of Prosecutors (AF), and the Professional and Independent Association of Prosecutors (APIF)—announced yesterday that they will continue with the strike, despite the fact that both the General Council of the Judiciary and the Attorney General's Office have issued reports stating that neither judges nor prosecutors have the right to strike and, therefore, minimum services will not be established. Both organizations are based on previous criteria, which have stated since 2012 that such a right does not exist in both professions. However, despite this, there have been several strikes over the years.

The strike committee announced that, as on previous occasions, they will be the ones to set the minimum services to guarantee judicial protection for citizens.

Furthermore, in response to criticism from the government, which accused them of going on strike without any financial impact, the committee warned in a statement that the strike will affect their pay, like any other worker. As a preliminary step to the strikes, a rally is being held today at the Supreme Court to demand the withdrawal of the reforms. Bolaños has already announced that not only will they not back down, but that they will continue their parliamentary process because they consider them essential for the modernization and democratization of the justice system.

For these five associations, these legislative reforms "seriously compromise the principles of judicial independence, separation of powers, and the autonomy of the public prosecutor's office." They argue that "the strike constitutes a legitimate, proportionate, and responsible measure in defense of the fundamental principles of the rule of law, judicial independence, and professional conditions."

In this regard, the organizing associations "firmly maintain that the right to strike is a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution; it cannot be interpreted restrictively; judges and magistrates are not excluded from its recognition, and the absence of specific implementing regulations does not imply their exclusion."

They argue that, as established by a ruling of the Constitutional Court, this is an individual right that each person can exercise autonomously without prior authorization or notification. They warn that "any attempt by an employer to condition, obstruct, or coerce a worker's decision regarding their participation in a strike constitutes a very serious violation and may result in financial penalties and even the annulment of disciplinary decisions."