At the top of the court, Carlos Rosenkrantz was the hottest day What was sued In the "Battle" case, only in front of his colleagues in court, a 2×1 controversy was applied to them, they were convicted of crimes against humanity in illegal repression. The judge warned that "the Court and the National Judiciary must improve and urgently need to do so." ".
"It is a renewal of the judicial culture. There is no strong judge, but the judge of authority," he argued. "And we never have any independent authority. Independence is an independent idea too moral, ideological and political convictions ", He has explained to Rosenk in a single reference in his single vote. "The idea of independence demands a decision that is morally, politically, or ideologically mandatory, as determined by one's individual opinion". Certainly, the judge clarified the "autobiographical example," and recalled last year that the second sentence of the Supreme Court, which was approved by Luis Muiña, was approved by the Supreme Court, was "a broad dissemination of social exclusion", which in my view was healthy. "The presence of the people of the streets I was just witnessing the belief in Nevermore's barbarism, but at the time I believed and still believe that the commitment never never expressed by Never Again is not at any cost whatsoever, but it is not a respect for the law and the Constitution, "he concluded.
Rosenkrantz subsequently reviewed the Criminal Justice of the Congress according to the "explanation" of the "abolition of crimes against human rights 2×1", yesterday, according to the law, "other members decided that 2×1 was not applicable to these offenses. I voted for a debate, because in my opinion the law is unconstitutional because it violates criminal law and does not violate the principle of retroactivity. It is not even now that I decided how it was impossible for me ", the judge continued, before the audience of ministers, governors, judges, and prosecutors, listening silently.
As I have done bugle In the last interview, Rosenkrantz reminded his work with Raúl Alfonsín and Carlos Nino jurists, "the intellectual father of human rights in Argentina." "But the difference between my personal commitment and my role as judge has to be a clear one. Judicial independence is the only faithful way to the Constitution and the only way to achieve progress, justice and well-being should be a letter of our navigation, no matter what because they are stormy, "he concluded. The fuse of the discussion was still burning.