Testing the Limits: Milei’s Mega-Decree and the Battle for Executive Authority in Argentina
Anúncios
To what extent may Milei use the prospect of a vote to approve his mega-decree? Limits on Executive authority are being warned by constitutionalists as the Argentine president tests the opposition of Congress.
The controversy surrounding Milei’s mega-decree and his potential use of a public vote to secure its approval has sparked a nationwide debate in Argentina. The megadecree, which entails the privatization of public firms and major economic deregulation, has drawn criticism from constitutionalists who argue that it infringes on the separation of powers and undermines the authority of Congress.
The Argentine president
In a recent television interview, the Argentine president casually hinted at the possibility of summoning a public consultation if the DNU (Decree of Necessity and Urgency) was rejected by Congress. When asked about the legality of such a move, Milei responded with a nonchalant “obviously,” suggesting that he sees no issue with using the prospect of a vote to push through his agenda.
However, constitutionalists have raised concerns about the limits of executive authority and the legality of Milei’s potential use of a public consultation. They argue that even if the president were to call for a plebiscite, the results would not be legally binding without the approval of Congress. The power to summon an enforceable public consultation resides solely with the legislative branch.
DNU
Additionally, critics contend that the very nature of the DNU itself raises legal questions. The megadecree seeks to overturn over 300 legislations that have already been passed by Congress, a move that some argue undermines the democratic process and violates the principle of separation of powers. Legal proceedings have been initiated against Milei by the União Popular party and the Civil Association Observatory of the Right to the City, asserting that the DNU breaches the constitutional principle of the separation of powers.
Constitutional lawyer Andrés Gil Domínguez has taken proactive steps to challenge the DNU’s validity. He has petitioned the court to annul the decree, arguing that it violates the principle of the separation of powers. Domínguez emphasizes that the Constitution and international human rights treaties serve as the guiding principles for governance in Argentina.
Despite the growing criticism and legal challenges, Milei remains steadfast in his determination to see his mega-decree come to fruition. He dismisses his detractors and declares that he will not back down, even if Congress or the Judiciary attempt to halt his plans. The president proudly cites a 75% support rating for his decree, viewing it as a vindication of his policies. However, critics argue that such public opinion should not supersede the constitutional framework and the authority of the legislative branch.
The controversy surrounding Milei’s mega-decree has not only ignited legal debates but has also sparked public outcry. The General Confederation of Labor has called for demonstrations against the government, scheduled to take place on Wednesday. In response, Minister of Security Patricia Bullrich has maintained a repressive stance, stating that protesters must stay on sidewalks and warning that those who block streets will be ineligible for social subsidies.
As the debate rages on, it is clear that the issue transcends Milei and his mega-decree. It raises fundamental questions about the balance of power, the role of the executive branch, and the democratic process in Argentina. The outcome of this controversy will have far-reaching implications for the country’s political landscape and governance.
