The General Council of the Judiciary (CGPJ) has been studying for months the possibility of introducing telematic voting. The measure has a favorable report from the technical cabinet of the CGPJ, but has run into opposition from the government chambers of the main courts.
Those who oppose this change argue, among other arguments, that this formula could favor the main conservative association to monopolize the majority of the members. The debate also comes as the PP tries to impose as a condition precedent to the reform of the system of election of the 12 member judges so that they are elected directly by the members of the career instead of by the Congress and the Senate, as is elected now. It is celebrated every five years and to which independent candidates or proposals by judicial associations can be submitted. The number of judges that comprise it varies depending on the court, but all are composed of ex officio members (including the president and the presidents of the chamber) and an equal number of magistrates or judges elected by their colleagues. The Organic Law of the Judiciary (LOPJ) provides that the election be carried out by in-person vote or by mail. According to many judges, the former is almost impossible to carry out for many members of the race. The law allows any colleague to vote for another by presenting only a photocopy of their ID or professional card. All associations admit that this system is used, but the least representative ones point out that the APM has a "perfectly oiled machinery to influence judges and monopolize votes. " The Francisco de Vitoria Association, Judges for Democracy, and the Independent Judicial Forum asked the CGPJ months ago to regulate telematic voting as a way to end this situation. "We want to banish non-transparent practices and allow us to vote from our workplace electronically, identify ourselves with the digital certificate, which no one is going to provide to another colleague," explains Edmundo Rodrguez, spokesperson for JJPD.