Presidential health: intimidation or democratic control?

A series of complaints against this PP dispute continues, culminating in the question “How do you like your friend’s job reform?” Miley for workers to work several hours a day?”

At first I thought it was going to be an AI generated video. At most, when there are palm trees (and not a call to the order of the President of Congress) for Bolaños to complete an intervention as unparliamentary as this.

But a quick internet search showed me that it was real.

minister, Ready to answer the request, he engaged in an attack on the MP. And from now on to comment in short form on the legislative process of the democratic state of the Ibero-American Commonwealth of Nations.

Out of curiosity, I went through the other 26 questions from the February 25 military review session, and the dynamics of the government with the opposition MPs (not the investiture package) were similar to Bolaños.

So, paraphrasing it, we can decide that if we think that the dialogues of the deaf (and sometimes deaf) of Congress could not degrade further, we are descubrimos a new escalón.

Members of the government are now not required to formally fulfill the constitutional mandate to “submit requests to Parliament” (Article 111 EC) until first They don’t bother you or pretend to question what you’re asking for.

And then they engage in attacking the speakers, including providing explanations on subjects in which they have no art or role.

It is not common for some members of the Andalusian government to import this technique, and when the Socialists ask them about the management, they respond with criticism. Sánchez y los suyos.

But let’s imagine for a moment that instead of the current scattered parliamentarism, we will enjoy a moderately serious parliamentarism, as in recent years, as recently mentioned.

Can the prime minister’s health be subject to parliamentary scrutiny?

Or, to put it another way: it holds MPs and Spanish public opinion in general derecho to know the state of health of the most important politician in the country?

“It’s not that my cabinet members give evasive answers to parliamentary questions: they don’t bother pretending to challenge what they’re asking for.”

Applying legal orthodoxy, we look for feedback in the written norms that regulate public costs, such as the Constitution, Ley 50/1997 of the Government and Ley 19/2013 on transparency.

In none of them do we find a mandate for members of the government to publicly inform them about their health status, as they are ordered to explain in their curricula (Article 2 of Law 3/2015, Regulation on the Performance of High Loads).

In principle, it can therefore be considered that the president preserves the right of all citizens to be intimidated. The regime requires a strengthened right in particular to the protection of health data envisaged in Basic Law 3/2018 on the protection of personal data and the European Data Protection Regulation 2016/679.

However, both the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights have repeatedly confirmed that the right to public information reduces the scope of intimidation of those seeking political accountability.

This question requires consideration between the parties in each case, bearing in mind that intimidation must give way when information affecting the public activity of the cargo or may affect its operation. Pues the right to information is fundamental to the formation of free public opinion (for all STC 79/2014, May 29).

When this consideration is focused on health, the scope for thinking that it is a purely private assumption is severely limited.

The European Court of Human Rights clearly confirmed this in its decision of 18 May 2004 in the Le Grand Secret case (Mitterrand): It is a legitimate public interest to know whether an expert in this state is physically able to perform his functions.

The long-lasting secrecy maintained over the illness of the French president was considered precisely a problem of democratic transparency.

“When doubts arise about the health of the President (and his physical aspect allows us to think so), the institutional response cannot be limited to silence or parliamentary insult.”

It is no coincidence that after this episode the practice of publishing medical periodicals became established in France, something similar to what happened in the United States after the attack on Reagan in 1981.

As such, a reflection David Owen en Power and disease: the rulers have a duty to honestly respect their health when it may affect the operation of the cargo “and the middlemen have a duty to prove it when they escape the truth”.

No one can but argue, as Owen does, that all candidates must have a healthy profile to stand for election.

But yes, it is defensible that when there are doubts about the health of the president (and the physical side, one can think of it), the institutional response cannot be limited to silence or parliamentary insult.

The president’s ironic salud me memes seem to be a very good way to develop political activism. But in a developed democracy, as our Constitution proclaims, they must be accompanied by a medical professional who will confirm them.

As recommended TocquevilleThe strength of democracies does not lie in the excellence of their rulers until there is the trust citizens place in their institutions.

And a little self-confidence can deter someone who refuses to disclose a controversial medical condition.

*** Agustín Ruiz Robledo is a member of the Constitution Department of the University of Granada.