The Buenos Aires government wants the conflict to be resolved by the Supreme Court. The national authorities argue the nullity of this claim
While for the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic there does not seem to be a crack between Alberto Fernández and Horacio Rodriguez Larreta, on other issues the crack between the President of the Nation and the Head of Government of the City seems increasingly larger.
An example of this scenario occurs in the judicial fight generated by the transfer of national land to Buenos Aires orbit carried out by former President Mauricio Macri a few days before the end of his term, on December 10 of last year.
The procedure was spearheaded by the State Property Administration Agency (AABE) during the management of Cambiemos, which yielded several properties in different areas of the Federal Capital such as Villa Crespo and Palermo or the so-called “Triangle of Salguero”, located between the avenues Salguero, the Presidente Arturo U. Illia highway and the Illia descent.
Although after the change of government, the new officials of this organization filed a judicial complaint to stop the transfers and obtained a favorable ruling, now the City is seeking that the case ends up being defined by the Supreme Court of the Nation.
With that objective, they presented a precautionary measure before the court of administrative contentious jurisdiction that in the first instance had been overturned by the claim of the Nation.
The Buenos Aires authorities seek to challenge the decision of the Federal Administrative Litigation Court 9 that in early June had rejected the proposals of the Buenosairean government and arranged to enable the judicial fair required by the AABE to prevent the change of jurisdiction of those lands.
The measure creates a serious cash problem for local authorities if it is taken into account that these are properties that must be put up for sale to use the proceeds from the so-called Paseo del Bajo works.
The City expects the litigation to be decided soon by the Supreme Court.
For this reason, the City’s lawyers argue in their statement that the precautionary measure was issued by an incompetent judge, taking into account that it is requested against the actions of the public powers of the Buenos Aires government. And for that reason, they ask that the conflict end up being resolved by the votes of the national Supreme Court.
However, in the document that the AABE has just presented, it is recalled that the agreement signed between the Ministry of Transport of the Nation, the agency and the Buenos Aires authorities on November 13, 2019 by which the land was transferred establishes in its fifth clause the jurisdiction of the federal administrative contentious justice “for the resolution of conflicts that may arise”.
And they add that in the land sale contract both the City and the Nation waived “irrevocably and to the fullest extent permitted by the laws of the country, any immunity or privilege they enjoy”.
That is, and always according to the interpretation of the AABE lawyers, that the City renounced “the privilege of the Original Competition of the CSJN”.
The controversy revolves around a decision of the then President Mauricio Macri
In the brief, the agency also refers to various existing questions regarding the process of selling land to the City and warns that having affected real estate to pay obligations, “denatures the function assigned to the AABE and implies a release of irreplaceable assets that belong to the National State “.
Regarding the actions of the City government, he recalls that the Professional Council for Architecture and Urbanism (CPAU), an organization created to regulate professional practice, “has expressed its concern about the number and importance of projects presented in the Buenos Aires Legislature aimed at alienate around 100 public real estate “.
Add that the state agency itself is preparing a report on the transfer review process with the objective of evaluating if all the legal procedures were fulfilled or if there are possible crimes or suspicions of irregularities.
“At present there is a clear controversy, because as stated when requesting the measure, the legality of the disposal of the property under the GCBA is being investigated as ordered by Decree 149/2020. That is, the controversy is current, and if the sale were to take place, the public interest would be frustrated by dispossessing the ENA of its assets, “the AABE lawyers warn.
As proof, they add that of the universe of transfers made to the City by the Nation, 41.90% were made in 2019. In other words, of 76 properties, 41 were transferred that year, “breaking, as stated, the end of mandate rule “.
Find out the latest on digital economy, startups, fintech, corporate innovation and blockchain. CLICK HERE