Protects Financial Independence of State’s Judicial Power and Attorney General
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) has declared two decrees issued by Cuauhtémoc Blanco, former governor of Morelos, partially invalid. These decrees were passed by the local state Congress, granting pensions for retirement and ordering their payment from resources of the local judicial power and state attorney general.
Background on Cuauhtémoc Blanco and Relevance
Cuauhtémoc Blanco served as the governor of Morelos from 2017 to 2024. During his tenure, he issued two decrees that have now been partially invalidated by the SCJN. These decrees concerned pension allocations for retirement, which were to be funded by the local judicial power and state attorney general resources.
Controversy Details
The controversy stems from two separate cases: Controversial 260/2024, promoted by the local judicial power, and Controversial 283/2024, promoted by the state’s Attorney General. The former challenged decrees that misused judicial resources, while the latter questioned a decree granting a pension to Carlos Alberto Figueroa Vázquez, the former state’s attorney general, during Graco Ramirez’s administration.
SCJN Ruling on Controversial 260/2024
In Controversial 260/2024, the SCJN declared invalid Decreto 1897, which misused judicial resources by ordering their allocation for pension payments. The court found that the local state Congress violated the principles of separation of powers and financial independence by interfering with the judicial power’s budget management.
SCJN Ruling on Controversial 283/2024
Controversial 283/2024 saw the invalidation of Decreto 1983, which granted a pension to Carlos Alberto Figueroa Vázquez. The state’s Attorney General argued that the decree was unconstitutional because it ordered payment from their budget, thereby violating their financial autonomy and institutional guarantee.
Key Questions and Answers
- What was the main issue addressed by the SCJN? The SCJN invalidated two decrees issued by Cuauhtémoc Blanco that misused resources from the local judicial power and state attorney general for pension payments.
- Who were the parties involved in these controversies? The local judicial power and state Attorney General were the plaintiffs in Controversial 260/2024 and Controversial 283/2024, respectively.
- What were the key findings of the SCJN? The court found that both decrees violated the principles of separation of powers and financial independence, as they interfered with proper budget management by the judicial power.
- What was the impact of these rulings? These decisions protect the financial independence and autonomy of the local judicial power and state Attorney General, ensuring proper resource allocation for their respective functions.
