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
- War in Ukraine: Rain of missiles, no more water or light and even less artillery Nov 23, 2022
- In the US, Warren Buffett was accused of helping protesters Jun 14, 2020
- World Cup 2022: “I prefer cricket”, will the fervor of the World Cup win Doha? Nov 18, 2022
- Coronavirus in Mexico: Nuevo León clubs will have a meeting to define the return of the public to the stadiums Oct 7, 2020
- In Mongolia, the teenager died of bubonic plague Jul 14, 2020
- A woman refuses to surrender to the parking authorities…and the “war” continues for 5 years Sep 2, 2021
- “Trash that smells like AIDS” May 29, 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.