The Permanent Commission of the General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) unanimously approved this Friday to express its “resounding rejection” of the criticism of the third vice president of the Government, Teresa Ribera, of the judge in the ‘Democratic Tsunami’ case, Manuel García Castellón, considering that they are “contrary” to the “duty to respect judicial independence”, while calling for “institutional responsibility” to “avoid the political use of Justice”. The three conservative members that make up the Permanent Commission – José Antonio Ballestero, Carmen Llombart and María Ángeles Carmona – had asked the interim president of the CGPJ, Vicente Guilarte, to call an urgent meeting of the same, something that has finally been done. electronically to deliver a unanimous statement, unusual in this Council, usually divided into progressive and conservative blocs. The object was to analyze Ribera’s words criticizing García Castellón’s recent resolution that confirms his decision to send ‘Tsunami Democràtic’ to the Supreme Court to investigate the former Catalan president and leader of Junts, Carles Puigdemont, to the general secretary of ERC , Marta Rovira, and 10 other people for alleged terrorism crimes. “I would be very cautious regarding the way in which this judge was speaking, who, as I say, has accustomed us to always leaning in this same direction, which obviously has an important political implication and usually comes up in political moments sensitive,” Ribera assured in statements to TVE, reported by .. For the Permanent Commission, “these manifestations are contrary to the principle of institutional loyalty” and “to the general duty to respect judicial independence inherent to a consolidated rule of law and member of the European Union, one of whose essential values is the separation of powers, essential to make the value of Justice a reality”. “Only judges who are trusted by their fellow citizens will be able to provide the right to effective judicial protection for the prevalence of the common values of the Rule of Law,” she emphasizes. Consequently, he indicates that these words, “insofar as they undermine the confidence of our fellow citizens in Justice and contribute to institutional deterioration, they deserve a resounding rejection, especially if they interfere with an ongoing investigation of the facts.” Furthermore, as he recalls that he has already done “on the occasion of other pronouncements by members of the Executive Branch in relation to actions of the courts”, he appeals “to moderation, prudence and restraint and to institutional responsibility to avoid the political use of Justice or questioning the independence, impartiality and professionalism of the judges and magistrates that make up the Judiciary. “With the most absolute respect for the right to freedom of expression, the Permanent Commission considers it essential to reaffirm that the actions of the Judiciary, an essential institution in every democratic society, pursue at all times compliance with the law and the defense of the rights recognized to all Spanish citizens, the foundation of our Social and Democratic State of Law”, he concludes.