During this day the National Board of Christian Democracy is being held, which will seek to elect new members to its Supreme Court and National Council. Meanwhile, party figures pointed to the legal inexistence of the current Supreme Court, under which the positions will be elected.
In the midst of its internal crisis, during this day the National Board of the Christian Democracy (DC), body in which the current National Directorate will deliver its political account and various issues related to the internal functioning of the party will be decided.
Among these, the election of the National Council and Supreme Court, stands out, in addition to the traditional political debate.
However, there are those who are concerned, since the current Supreme Court would not be active, according to the legal period given by the Servel.
Read Also
- Un Posto al Sole, advances from 30 August to 3 September: Susanna is attacked! Aug 28, 2021
- We are waking up! May 28, 2021
- EU Foreign Minister: 150,000 Russian troops at Ukraine’s border and in Crimea Apr 20, 2021
- Another effect of the war: more than 80 species of animals are in danger of extinction in Ukraine Nov 20, 2022
- Norway – France: Hard blow for Les Bleues, swept away by their pet peeve… Relive the half with us Nov 19, 2022
- 2022 World Cup: What if the “Qatar vuvuzela” was the invention of two French people? Nov 25, 2022
- ISS astronauts splash down off Florida on SpaceX craft May 2, 2021
This was pointed out by the former president of the DC, Fuad Chahín, who assured that this Board would be a mistake.
Let us remember that this Supreme Court suspended his militancy for the ex-conventional, after supporting the Rejection option in the Exit Plebiscite.
One of the party’s vice presidents, Joanna Pérez, agreed with Chahín and assured that they will seek to work in accordance with the legislation.
He also assured that with the instance he hopes that a political debate will open without definitions, in order to “take a picture” and see what the DC militancy really wants, especially after the plebiscite, in which he described as an “error” that would have been forced the militants to be for the I approve option.