The Nominating Commission for the choice of attorney general and head of the Public Ministry (MP) has planned to meet this Monday April 20 to integrate the payroll of six candidates that must be transferred to president of the republic.
This commission seeks to form a initial list with 12 candidatesfrom which will come the six candidates.
However, although they were evaluated 48 people with the gradation table that measures aspects such as academic preparation, professional experience and ethics, only nine surpassed the qualification of 75 pointswhich was originally agreed upon as the note minimum for an applicant to be eligible for the roster.
Now they must decide Yeah they lower the score of that cutting line or What criteria will they apply?.
Asked about the process developmentthe form of qualify or the profiles postulates, representatives of entities that have observed this process presented different factors.
They agreed that although meet requirementsthe process was formalist and rigidhence was needed greater depth and consistency in evaluation and that they exist structural weaknesses in the model.
Furthermore, although they were rated 48 applicantsthere were higher expectations regarding the suitability either qualificationsand that now the final vote that will be decisive must be observed.
Background analysis
Mónica Marroquín, deputy director of Guatemala Visiblesaid that this organization has observed, not only in this process, but in others that have occurred in nomination committees, that with the gradation table sometimes only measures the number of yearsbut the quality or the backgroundespecially in the experience and path of the applicants.
He said that the entity has done some recommendations in the sense that one must have clarity in several aspects, first about the qualities that are needed for the profile and, based on that, evaluate people.
He explained that they have criticized that many times the nomination committees are very rigorous in compliance with the form or formal requirements and, although it is understood that there are rules and criteria previously established that must be met, these They do not address the underlying issues that are very important and they must also evaluate.
CONTENT FOR SUBSCRIBERS
Among these refers to weighing the experience of the person and discuss it some more. For example, first, be clear about the profile needed and assess What has that person’s career been like? It should also be observed if has had leadership and experience in leading teams or an institution.
“We have always said that sometimes the nomination committees are very short in that discussion when they define the profile as very essential and they add a few qualities more, but we don’t see this discussion to depth”, he expressed.
Consider that there are some shortcomings within it Application Commissions Law that have been evident for years and changes need to be made to these procedures.
This Monday, after defining whether lower the cutting line or what procedure they will use to complete the list 12 applicants and from there to choose the nominees, you must enter the rounds in which the commissioners must rule on whether the person is honorable or not, and this is where they must also weigh the ethical meritsbut it will depend a lot on the judgment and criteria of each one when seeing trajectory, blemishes and other factors, Marroquín explained.
There are no established standards
Separately, Christa Walter, executive director of the National Civic Movement (MCN), explained that each application commission process is differentdespite following the same modelbecause sometimes they include interviews and psychometric tests; others only do the gradation table and the profile that forces the Application Commissions Law.
Consider that in the current process it was positive that they were made interviews to aspiring attorney general.
However, he stated that it is necessary reflect about this model of nomination committees, since every time a process is carried out it seems that start from scratchas if the ways to approve the tools they use to assess to the aspirants, and there is no standards established.
Read also: Gradation table excludes young candidates, says Impunity Watch
He believes that, both this and any other nomination commission, should have the higher and more rigorous standards to evaluate the applicantsbut what if the best professionals They do not attend these calls“the commissioners cannot get out of your sleeve applicants, hello good either bad gradesbut they have to work with the files that they arrive”.
Regarding what is expected from the process, consider that 75 points is what reasonable enough to be the line court and, even with the few profiles who surpassed that score, the vote of the commissioners will be a day long.
Believe there will be tense moments due to disagreements between commissionersbut hopes that, with the six profiles that make up the payroll, the President of the Republic can take the best decision for the country, not thinking about their own interests or those of his political party, but rather who may be the most able and suitable for the institution of Public Ministryseeking justice clean and not a justice revanchist.
Discretion
In addition, Carmen Aída Ibarra, director of the Pro Justice Movementcommented that the nomination process for candidates for attorney general has not turned out as expectedsince there was high expectations that more professionals would participate who would offer guarantees of suitability, capacity and good repute to recover the institution.
As he explained, it was intended that these profiles will guide a transition to leave behind undemocratic practicesavoid the weakening of the tax careerstop the spurious criminal prosecution and the criminalizationand resume the route of modernization, democracy and organization.
“Unfortunately, there was not an abundance of profiles professionals who offer this and the few who showed up have succumbed to the application rigged of the gradation table“Ibarra commented, adding that the Nomination Commission “has caused impoverish the process quality because the plenary session is responsible for the fact that lost quality“when making decisions regarding qualification with a extreme rigor which affected many professionals.
Ibarra said that, regarding dissemination and advertising of the election process of the MP prosecutor, the commission yes it was transparentunlike other application processes that took place this year; However, he believed that did not meet expectations due to deficiencies in the design and application of the gradation table.
He considered that the process I would have progressed better yes, at the beginning qualifications in the commission, criteria such as compute the exercise of the profession only from record of the lawyers in the Supreme Court of Justiceand not taking into account the common practice of counting from college professional mandatory in the Bar Association. Applying that criterion, left out several candidatesincluding whom many identified as possible next attorney generalhe commented.
He explained that it was observed that there were applicants who did not provide sufficient means of verification so that the points were awarded; others who yes they presented thembut the commission decided not to validate them for considering them not suitable; and a third group that was affected because some commissioners sought to rule out deliberately means of verification to cause them a low grade.
CONTENT FOR SUBSCRIBERS
Now we must observe what criteria apply in the session scheduled for this Monday to define the list of 12 applicants and, from them, choose the six nomineessaid Ibarra.
However, he pointed out that the cutting line makes no sensesince the Law of Nomination Commissions does not require voting for the best qualifiedbut only to order the list of applicants in descending order, from the highest score to the lowest.
Those eligible
- María Consuelo Porras – 92.33 points
- César Augusto Ávila Aparicio – 92.13 points
- Brenda Dery Muñoz Sánchez – 90.86 points
- Julio Rivera Clavería – 88.93 points
- Walter Paulino Jiménez Tejax – 86.73 points
- Gabriel Estuardo García Luna – 86.21 points
- Néctor Guilebaldo de León Ramírez – 79.69 points
- José Manuel Quinto Martínez – 79 points
- Henry Alejandro Elías Wilson – 76.85 points