Today, Rodolfo Barra, Attorney General of the Nation, became the main voice of the Government amidst the debate over limiting President Javier Milei's ability to govern through decrees of necessity and urgency. In a plenary session of the Constitutional Affairs and Petitions, Powers and Regulation commissions, Barra explained the legal and regulatory framework governing decrees of necessity and urgency.
The Attorney General emphasized that the authority to issue decrees is backed by the national Constitution and highlighted that the assessment of exceptional circumstances that justify their use is of a political nature. He acknowledged that there may be contradictions between the President's opinion and Congress, but defended the use of decrees as a tool to encourage Congress to legislate on urgent matters.
Barra explained that, although a DNU (Decree of Necessity and Urgency) has the force of law, it has limitations regarding the subjects it can cover and is subject to exceptional circumstances. He pointed out that a DNU comes into effect upon its publication and, unlike a law, does not require approval, although it can be repealed at any time by another decree or by a law from Congress.
In the plenary, it was established that there are still between 9 and 11 speakers to participate in the debate, which will resume next Wednesday. The goal is to issue a ruling on the proposed projects, which seek to modify the regime of decrees of necessity and urgency to require the rejection of a single chamber of Congress to nullify a decree, as well as to set a validity period for DNUs.
The debate revolves around the excessive use of decrees of necessity and urgency by President Milei, due to the limited representation of the ruling party in Congress. Political parties of different tendencies have presented proposals to change the law regulating DNUs in an attempt to modify a regime that has been in effect for 18 years. Both Kirchnerists and members of the PRO have recently shown a change of position concerning this issue.
