“The suitability that the State Attorney General preaches of Eduardo Esteban for his proposal for promotion to the first category of the prosecutor’s career and his appointment as prosecutor of the Juvenile Coordinator Chamber of the State Attorney General’s Office fails to meet the requirements imposed by the judgment of the Supreme Court insofar as it makes it fall substantially on praiseworthy merits, but unrelated to the matter of minors, which are the ones that the Supreme Court wants to be weighed and analyzed, while at the same time incurring in obvious contradictions to detract from José Miguel de la Rosa in professional activities directly linked to minors, undervaluation and suppression of merits of the latter and fictitious exaltation of those of Esteban in the matter of minors who, in addition, grotesquely deny the first, and are valued with respect to the second, “says the Association of Prosecutors (AF) in the incident of execution of sentence that has been presented in the Supreme Court, which has had access THE WORLD.

The majority association of prosecutors considers that the new appointment of Eduardo Esteban as chief coordinating prosecutor for Minors -despite the fact that this appointment had previously been annulled by the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the High Court- constitutes a “mockery” by Dolores Delgado to Supreme.

From the AF they maintain that the sentence gives “extraordinarily clear guidelines so that the proposal fully responds to what was ruled by the High Court, which does not respect in any way the one presented by the State Attorney General.”

Likewise, in the incident of execution, the Association of Prosecutors emphasizes that in the motivation for Esteban’s proposal, Delgado “begins with an extensive claim of the powers of the Attorney General of the State, well known, in which it is glimpsed ” a kind of reproach” to the High Court for forcing it to respect the basic principles” that are contained in the sentence in which the appointment of the prosecutor of the Juvenile Coordinator Room is annulled.

Lastly, the appellants stress that “although formally the sentence is executed as soon as there is a proposal, it does not minimally comply with the guidelines that the Supreme Court gives, the State Attorney General blatantly ignoring the requirement that the proposal must consider and analyze, always in terms of minors, the merits of the two candidates in contention”.

In this way, the majority association of prosecutors asks the magistrates of the Third Chamber to issue a new order where they force Delgado to make another proposal for the prosecutor of the Juvenile Chamber, in accordance with the provisions of this court in sentence.

Conforms to The Trust Project criteria