Judicial Efficiency in ArgentinaEssay Preview: Judicial Efficiency in ArgentinaReport this essay[Your Name][Instructor Name][Course Number][Date]Judicial Efficiency in Argentina Judicial efficiency in Argentina is significantly lacking. The country ranks 169th out of 178 countries studied regarding their economic freedom. The people of Argentina are considered economically repressed based on the wrong rule of law, limited government, regulatory efficiency and lack of open markets. Of the most concern is the corruption and inefficiency of the judicial system. The 2016 Heritage Index of Economic Freedom notes “corruption plagues Argentine society, and scandals are common…The justice system is burdened by scores of tenured but incompetent and corrupt judges. The lower courts are highly politicized, although the Supreme Court maintains relative independence despite intense pressure from the government.” Bribery, forgery, theft, and many other corrupt actions take place every day in the Argentine judicial system (The Heritage Foundation).The political structure that allows the judicial and executive branches to be also intertwined provides a backdrop for corruption. Many judges were appointed to their positions by lawmakers which creates a conflict of interest. When these lawmakers or people close to them come through the court system either for corruption charges or other offenses they typically do not receive a sentence as they are the ones who were instrumental in the employment of that judge. Also, judges overseeing important cases may be offered political jobs, further developing the corruption seen in Argentine courts. A study of the corruption in Argentina has found that cases involving corruption take 14 years on average to be finalized. Out of a total 750 corruption cases analyzed, only 15 suspects were convicted of their crimes (The Heritage Foundation).
Balancing the judicial inefficiencies and corruption is the political environment in Argentina. In presidential elections in November 2015, Mauricio Macri, the center-right politician, beat Daniel Scioli. Scioli was the hand-picked replacement of President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. Macri won greatly due to his promises to “end abuses that have plagued Argentina’s political and economic environments, including fiscal profligacy, labor unrest, rising protectionism, corruption, and expropriations.” Argentina is a land that should benefit from it’s natural resources and the people who live there are both educated and sophisticated. With these benefits, the country should be thriving, but it was failed to do so. Peronist authoritarianism and a wide variety of strategic missteps have led to the corruption of government and judicial systems. These mistakes include continued hold over the Falkland Islands and a miscarriage to make arrangements with creditors, leading the country to fail to make payments on reorganized debt. “These mistakes have positioned Argentina outside the mainstream of the international community” (The Heritage Foundation).
The Argentine government was elected with an iron fist to a long-term political promise, and the next term. But it did suffer by not dealing with the corruption of judicial and other institutions. In the aftermath of the 2007 financial crisis, Argentina was forced to move back to a status quo that was far less favorable, including the imposition of a financial control regime and an extensive military involvement in the judiciary. As Argentina’s constitution guarantees a “constitutional process,” it is one that may be less democratic and more beholden to a political elite who are incapable of governing. In this situation, many elected officials, many top generals, and even some of the top state heads are not well-suited to being considered for a post in the “Justice and Development.” The political elite’s ability to deal with and control corruption is a powerful tool to create and maintain a stable political system in Latin America. The current administration of the current administration of President Cristina Kirchner is a direct result of the failed policies of the neoliberal era. The state structure of the country, including the public sector, has always been neoliberal—a model of neoliberal economic development that makes government efficient and accessible. And in the absence of such an approach, the future of Argentina remains uncertain, as the country remains riddled with “fiscal instability,” corruption, and corruption and its effects on the entire economy. As a society, the future of Argentina is uncertain, as it continues to become vulnerable and in need of reform and accountability. It was a democracy in which democracy in this country was possible but imperfect. There is no justice for everyone and no transparency regarding how the government conducts its affairs, and many people are unaware that they are being forced to work on their own and are not making any decisions about how to implement their decisions. With a limited government, the government was ineffective, at best, and at worst, corrupt, and at worst, illegitimate. And, in a country governed by oligarchic autocracies, that system is far larger. More than that, it is increasingly corrupt, even as corruption and oligarchy have been replaced by democratic government in Argentina. The problem of corruption is one of institutionalizing it, and with no one in place to fix that problem, the only effective recourse is an independent judiciary.
The second crisis is that of economic stagnation. As the economic stagnation has pushed the country out of the financial sphere, the state was able to tap into an existing wealth gap and to create even more inefficiencies and corruption with the economic downturn of the 1990s. Today Argentine government spending is expected to surpass $3 trillion, and the current budget deficit is $5 billion, compared to the current level. This may indicate that despite a massive over-funding of state institutions, the government is unable to create productive jobs like universities, art and science. This is a reflection of a broader breakdown in the country’s economic and political system. A growing number of public workers are unemployed, and as these jobs are not available in the private sector, they do not have sufficient funds to support economic growth. This means that the government is unable to meet the needs of the community, provide basic services like public education, transportation, and healthcare, but it also means that most of these people are poor and homeless so that the financial resources available to those who can actually afford to go to school are not available. This means that there is a lack of affordable housing due to the lack of budget for public education, the most important part of the public investment program for these public schools that started in 2013. In addition, it also means that some of the poor are unable to find work because of the fact that many of their relatives are unemployed. The public sector does not provide enough jobs to meet the needs of its communities, and instead
[*]
Many public sector workers have been on the move in the past, but the government still has not provided enough financing to allow them to move forward. Furthermore, a lack of budget in relation to the necessary investment in higher education and social services is making that a challenge. As a result, many of these public sector workers are unable to find work because of the lack of budget provided to them.
A recent government survey showed that there are 10,000 public sector workers working just one, or 50 hours a week, but the current level of spending for public sector social security (Social Security) is $1.7 billion in 2016, with a number of these workers working more than 25 hours a day.
This year there have been about 4.5 million hours of work in public sector social security services, which could amount to about $25 million. This includes not only the elderly, but also the under-30s, who work the most.
For these people, all the social security programs are not adequate.
[*]
With the public sector only providing nearly $10 billion of the $30 billion needed by 2017, it is difficult to envisage a time when those funds should be available after this current spending cuts in the coming years.
[*]
For years these public sector workers also have been struggling for decent wages in their communities, especially in the poorer and less educated parts of their hometowns: in 2013/14 the unemployment rate was 42%. In 2013 the average monthly pay of public sector workers fell from $3.14 to $2.75, and the average monthly wage for private sector workers fell from $9.47 to $4.60.
This increase has been mainly as a result of the declining prices of the public transport and heating products.
It is only under the administration of the Minister of Public Works and Human Resources that the low pay rates of private sector workers at this time make it difficult for our public sector workers to continue with the growth of their own community living demands, which have reached 50% of the national national income.
In the first 12 months of 2016 the average monthly gross annual employment of public servants at this time was 5,000. Only 5% of this number had returned to work or increased their employment to 5,000. The national labour force participation rate was 58%. The overall contribution to labour insecurity is lower at these times.
[*]
In May 2016, public sector workers were able to claim about 70% of the benefits to the economy. They made a lot of money through the social welfare program through contributions, not just through work
they even were considered eligible for the money provided by the federal government and the private sector.
For example, in early 2011 and 2015, for example, people were able to bring their family member into work to participate in the social welfare program, but for years these people were not eligible for this in 2017 as their benefits and social security contributions could be withdrawn. Because of this the Government cut back some of the benefits made available through the social welfare program including the payments of state education subsidies, the social security payments to public sector workers and the payment