The public company had requested the measure against the members of the Court for “prejudice”, after they ruled out a similar measure against Judge Recarey.
He Civil Appeals Court of the 4th Shift ruled against the National Administration of State Water Works (OSE) Regarding the Arazatí project, which is slowed down by the Justice. The state-owned company had challenged the members of the court for “prejudicing” the case, but the court did not approve the measure.
He Arazatí project, which involves the construction of a new water treatment plant in Saint Joseph, The project, which is intended to supply the metropolitan area – the most affected by the water crisis that arose after last year’s historic drought – continues to encounter legal obstacles in its implementation.
In that sense, and after that OSE to challenge the Court of Appeals for “prejudice” —after the latter rejected the public company’s challenge to the judge Alejandro Recarey, who put a judicial stop to the signing of the contract for the execution of the project—, the same court again rejected the presentation against its own members.
According to the ruling, and as reported by El País, “it does not explain in detail and specifically which of the grievances articulated by OSE could not be resolved by the court, and the reason why it considers that there is “prejudice”. For this reason, the Court of Appeals referred the accusations to the Supreme Court of Justicewhich will be responsible for returning the case to the 4th Shift or passing it on to another.
Another presentation at the Court of Appeals
In parallel, at the beginning of the month, the consortium Waters of Montevideoin charge of the construction of the new water treatment plant in San José, filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals against the precautionary measure of Judge Recarey, who ordered the construction to be stopped. Arazati project given the possibility that the initiative constitutes a process of partial privatization of the supply of drinking water. For the private sector, the judge “violated their rights” by not allowing the appeal of the resolution.
Saceem, Berkes, Ciemsa and Fast Industry and Commerce LTDA They filed a complaint against the denial of appeal, after Recarey rejected this appeal by the consortium considering that the companies “are not a party” in the judicial process, according to El País; and despite the fact that the magistrate’s resolution requires OSE to suspend the signing of the contract for Arazati with those same companies.
Through the legal representative of the consortium, and together with the document, they also presented a report prepared by the president of the Ibero-American Institute of Procedural Law, Santiago Pereira Campos, who was consulted about possible irregularities in the judge’s conduct.
In the report, Pereira Campos stated that, “in any case, the Consortium companies should have been allowed to appear as third parties in the provisional measures process” and argued that the companies in question had “legitimacy to appeal the resolution of the case.”
Source: Ambito
