They ask the Ministry led by Pilar Llop to “fulfill the commitments made”
MADRID, 18 Oct. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The National Association of Lawyers of the Administration of Justice (CNLAJ) and the Progressive Union of Lawyers of the Administration of Justice (UPSJ) have expressed the general “growing increase in discontent” of the group while they have claimed the Ministry directed by Pilar Llop a meeting with the “greatest possible urgency”.
As reported by the College of LAJs, both groups sent a letter to the Secretary General of the Administration of Justice on Monday in which they showed their “concern about the lack of specification and implementation of the agreements assumed” by the department.
Thus, and “being very aware” of the current situation, both associations “consider it essential that the Ministry of Justice specify the actions that it is going to launch to develop all the aforementioned projects, with the necessary detail and commitment” in that encounter.
“The fact is that a month has elapsed since the last meeting held with the Ministry of Justice, there is still no noticeable progress in the pending issues: the Regulatory Impact Analysis Report (MAIN) regarding the groups of population,” they lament.
But it is that, they add, “it does not go out to public information, nor is it submitted to the union table or to the rest of the reports; the reform of the Royal Decree of substitutions is being unjustifiably delayed; the amendment of the hitch was not included in the Organizational Efficiency Project Law and the ranking is still not published”.
“Furthermore, it is unknown why the organic statute project has not been presented at the last meeting of Secretaries of Government; extensions of working hours are still not authorized in those bodies with plans to reinforce civil servants; the application that allows to justify the substitutions, and thus a long etcetera of repeated breaches of commitments assumed and reaffirmed in multiple meetings by the Ministry of Justice”, they criticize.
That is why both the CNLAJ and the UPSJ have insisted on the “need to know in what terms the word given by the Ministry of Justice with the Superior Corps of Judicial Lawyers is maintained, before adopting any other initiative.”
