In the 19 years that he has been in the Room of the Contentious-Administrative of the Supreme Court Nicholas Maurandi (Villena, Alicante, 1950), Nicholas Maurandi I had not been in a situation as uncomfortable as that has had to manage with the controversy of the mortgage tax. Presides over the second section, the author of the statement on 16 October stated that the payment of the tax applicable to the bank, not the client. Three weeks after, the full of the room withdrew that decision. Maurandi considered positive criticism to avoid repeating mistakes and regrets, the image offered by the court.
Question. once it has settled the controversy over the tax of the mortgage, what balance does?
Response. To the Supreme Court, the balance is very negative. For two reasons. We have offered data that justify a distrust of citizens to the performance of what should be a court of justice and, above all, the Supreme. And on the other hand, because we have not known how to make the exercise of containment and compromise, which corresponds to a court when addressing problems of this scale.
Q. to what extent it has affected the image of independence of the courts and of the Supreme?
A. Yes, it has affected. But to make a self-criticism would be of what has happened can help that similar situations do not recur.
we have Not acted with the compromise, which corresponds to a court,
Q. do The rectification of jurisprudence in three weeks broke the trust in the justice?
A. Yes. Has been broken for that, and for something more. It has given you a picture of that when what are at stake are economic interests that affect financial institutions the court touches the alarm to rethink their actions. In July saw the issue of the surplus-value, which has an economic dimension very similar to that of the mortgage, he gave a reply contrary to the interests of many citizens and do not it occurred to no one to convene a plenary to review that solution. But now the affected were the financial institutions and this is what has moved the image of that what justifies you to meet him fully is not the stud’s economic problem, but also who is affected. This idea is very negative for the image of justice.
MORE INFORMATION
The judgment of the mortgages will cost the dealer at least 2,300 million if it is retroactive, according to Moody’s, The big mess of the mortgages: three years of chaos in court the tax, The Supreme leaves in the air the effect of the judgment on the tax of the mortgage –
Q. do you Consider that some of the judges they were led by external pressures?
A. I don’t know. Some legitimately have understood that the involvement it had in the financial world justified to rethink the problem to see if it was correct decision of October or had to review it.
Q. what Had been called the full from the beginning?
If the parties should be involved in choosing the Council, which is made with transparency
A. I Think yes. It would have been much better.
Q. Is it raised?
A. No.
Q. what Or when it was discussing and saw that I could change the doctrine?
A. What’s happened is that you had pointed out, a view, and, after this, the only thing that fits is deliberate and imposing the sentence. After the view is no longer may refer the matter to the plenary.
Q. The president of the Third Chamber, Luis Díez-Picazo said that she had found out by the press of the change of criteria. What he had been warned that I could modify the case-law?
A. He knew of the existence of the matter because it is part of the room that decided to support these resources. And also it made him come during the deliberations that saw complex the topic. When supported by an appeal, except that you understand that the admission is pure theatre, you have to understand that one can only study the issue and make a decision.
Q. How do you assess the role played by Díez-Picazo?
A. Had the power to elevate the matter to the full. But the circumstances were unfortunate because they generated the image which we have discussed. And I do not agree with how he addressed the debate in the plenary about the effects it could have to the change of jurisprudence. Simplified too, there was need for a more thorough analysis, but did not give that possibility.
Q. This controversy has coincided with the pact between the parties to renew the General Council Betmatik of the Judiciary and to place on the presidency to Manuel Marchena, which has ended up giving up. How do you assess this situation?
A. The law says that you first choose the vowels, and these elect the chairman. But I’m not so concerned about that you can think about previously who is president. And that even the parliamentarians who want to intervene in that decision to do so. But it should be in a transparent process, in a parliamentary debate in which they discuss who could be president and be considered trajectories. What I don’t find it is that you do it in secret. If you think that the political forces should intervene, it is done with light and reporter.
Q. do you think that You have to intervene the parties or that the members of the council should be chosen by the judges?
A. I believe that justice is society, not of the judges. And who should appoint him to the Parliament. What happens is that the criterion should not be partisan but legal, and obey professional careers. And should avoid corporativismos. I would be in favour of the judges we were to designate the candidates jurists, not judges. And the jurists proposed to the candidates for judges.
Q. In the coming months, the Supreme court faced the judgment of the procés. How to return the confidence in the institution?
A. we All have the obligation to contribute to respect for the freedom of the court as judges. That it develops in a climate of serenity. And when you leave the sentence the judge with parameters of legality, not of another type.
Q. The judges have called several protests against the Government. Do you participate in them?
A. I Understand the situation of the companions who decide to take that step. The justice in Spain has a few components muand good: great independence, honesty and professional dedication of the judges. But we have not known how to define a bureaucracy judicial modern to allow it to work with the same technical means that other public or private organisations. The problem is not only to increase the funds or the number of courts, but also of design.
Q. Should address the reform of the Constitution?
A. Is a framework of coexistence very well. But he accuses the passage of time, because further problems arise. I would define as subjective rights that today are mere guiding principles of social policy. And it is also important to the territorial organization. It is evident that it does not satisfy all and has created tensions. Would you stand how you would modify for all the world to feel comfortable in it.
“The individual votes are a response to the tone angry of the sentence”
Question. The judgment of the mortgage and the individual votes subscribed to disagree it exchanged reproaches in a tone very hard. What should have been avoided?
Response. I did Not like. The plenary took a decision and at the end it said that the sentence would be in terms respectful. The surprise has come to the view that is expressed in terms of sudden and even derogatory. It speaks of a decision inopinada and radical. I seem to sense a certain irritation that the decision voted out disqualified almost immediately socially and institutionally, with the royal decree law promoted by the Government. And that this has led them to that, because they can’t mess with the Parliament, meddle with the second section
Q. there is Also a high pitched in the individual votes.
A. Has been a response to the tone angry to the sentence.
Q. How restañan those wounds?
A. Making an effort to reach harmony.
Q. how The tax law was unclear? What should be clarified before?
A. The law does not specified who should pay the tax on documented legal acts on the mortgages. It was limited to a general rule that said that you should pay the acquirer and a subsidiary which indicated that it would pay the person to whose interest the issuing of a notarial document. The Supreme court established that will pay the one who asks for the loan, but the resources that we study argued that it is difficult to determine “the purchaser” and who has a greater interest in registering the mortgage is the creditor because it can exercise the privileges of the mortgage guarantee. We consider that these arguments were legally more consistent than those of the previous case law and justified their change.
