📋 Tender Overview
The Constitutional Court (TC) declared unfounded by a majority the unconstitutionality lawsuit filed by 25% of the legal number of congressmen against Law 31810 that modifies Law 29158, Organic Law of the Executive Power, regarding the assignment of the Office of the President of the Republic and its management through digital technologies when traveling abroad.
In the judgment (Exp. 00011-2023-PI/TC), it is pointed out that the challenged law has been limited to enabling the possibility that, when the president travels abroad, authorized by Congress and does not have vice presidents, he maintains, in that exceptional case, the management of the presidential office.
In relation to the viability of the legislative option adopted, the TC indicates that in recent years, there has been an intense development of telematic technologies and platforms specifically designed for the remote interaction of participants who access a common virtual room, in which they can debate, share reflections and documents and, eventually, Record the content of all or part of the session.
The Court notes that the Constituent Assembly did not foresee the possibility that there would be no vice president during a certain presidential term, who could be entrusted with the office.
In this sense, the Collegiate specifies that the option for the President of the Republic to travel outside the country and maintain the remote management of the office is not contrary to the Constitution and, therefore, imposes the duty to justify the urgency and need to resort to digital technologies, guaranteeing computer security, nor can it be considered contrary to the Fundamental Norm.
In addition, it warns that, in the legislative context indicated, it cannot be considered unconstitutional to grant Parliament the power to assess "the particularity of each case". Indeed, if Congress has the competence to authorize the departure from the country, the requirement that the Executive Branch sustain the urgency and necessity of the remote management of the office in such a case cannot be considered unconstitutional.
