Argentina Has Made 166 Judicial Appointments, Not 166 Judges
ARGENTINA · JUSTICE
Key Facts
- —The figure 166 judicial appointments in a year, announced by Justice Minister Juan Bautista Mahiques.
- —What they are not They are not 166 judges. The total mixes judges, prosecutors and public defenders.
- —The route Judicial council competition, then Senate confirmation, then a presidential decree. The ordinary constitutional path.
- —The Senate It approved 67 nominations on 27 August. Sixty-six passed unanimously.
- —The real driver A backlog. Appointments were close to frozen in the first two years of the term.
- —The claim to treat carefully That early rulings favour the government. That is a press characterisation, not a finding.
The headline number is right and the description attached to it is wrong. Reading the breakdown changes what the story is about.
Argentina’s justice ministry says the government has made 166 judicial appointments in a year. The figure is being reported as 166 new judges.
What the 166 Actually Contains
Justice Minister Juan Bautista Mahiques announced the total on 8 September 2026.
The final tranche of 63 was formalised by decrees in the official gazette that day. It breaks down as 42 judges, 9 prosecutors and 12 public defenders.
An earlier tranche in July covered 33 appointments: 21 judges, 6 substitute judges, 4 prosecutors and 2 defenders.
The remaining 103 are not itemised in any of the coverage. One outlet puts the judge count at 125 of the 166, and that figure is unconfirmed.
How an Argentine Judge Is Appointed
The process is set by the constitution and has not been changed. It runs in three stages.
The judicial council holds a competitive examination and sends the executive a binding shortlist of three names. The president selects one.
The Senate then holds a public hearing and votes on confirmation. Only after that does the president formalise the appointment by decree.
This matters because the decree is the last step, not the mechanism. Describing these as appointments by decree inverts the process.
The Senate Vote
The Senate approved 67 nominations on 27 August 2026. Sixty-six were unanimous.
One was contested. Pablo Bertuzzi passed by 44 votes to 23.
A separate episode should not be confused with this one. In 2025 the government tried to seat two Supreme Court judges during the Senate recess, and that attempt failed.
Why the Number Is Large
The government describes it as the most judicial confirmations in a single year since the judicial council was created in 1994.
No official comparative series has been published to support that. One outlet cites first-three-year totals of 118, 153 and 146 for the three preceding presidencies, unverified.
The simpler explanation is backlog. Appointments were close to frozen during the first two years of this term, and the vacancies accumulated.
Even after 166 appointments, roughly a quarter of federal judicial posts remain vacant. That is the figure that puts the total in proportion.
The Claim About Favourable Rulings
This is where the reporting outruns the evidence. The Argentine outlet El Destape published a list on 5 September, using a total of 170 rather than 166.
It points to Bertuzzi and Llorens confirming the removal of private accusers in the LIBRA cryptocurrency case. The same judges upheld the dismissal of a case over the 2018 loan from the International Monetary Fund.
Both rulings came a day after a swearing-in ceremony. The connection offered is proximity in time and a photograph, not evidence of coordination.
Bertuzzi and Llorens are long-standing appeals judges in the federal criminal court. They were reconfirmed in this batch rather than newly appointed.
The news agency MercoPress states the point plainly. It has not been established that the judges involved form part of the group of new appointments.
The Objections That Are on the Record
Two civil society organisations have raised process complaints. The Civil Association for Equality and Justice and the Centre for Legal and Social Studies both cite irregularities and conflicts of interest.
Those are procedural objections to how competitions were run. They are not claims about how individual judges have ruled.
That distinction is worth holding. A weak appointment process is a serious problem on its own terms, and it does not require a ruling to prove it.
What Is Not Known
The full breakdown of the 166 has not been published. Nor has any official comparison with previous governments.
No documented link exists between the new appointments and specific rulings. The claim rests on timing, and it is one outlet’s framing.
For a foreign investor watching Argentine legal risk, the useful fact is the vacancy rate. A quarter of federal posts are still empty, and that shapes how quickly cases move.
More: Argentina news and analysis, every day from The Rio Times.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many judges has Milei appointed?
The government reports 166 judicial appointments. That total includes prosecutors and public defenders as well as judges.
How are judges appointed in Argentina?
A judicial council competition produces a binding shortlist, the president selects, the Senate confirms, and a decree formalises it.
When did the Senate vote?
On 27 August 2026, approving 67 nominations, 66 of them unanimously.
Is it a record?
The government says so. No official comparative series has been published to confirm it.
Do the new judges rule for the government?
That is asserted by one outlet on the basis of timing. No documented link has been established.
How many posts are still vacant?
Roughly a quarter of federal judicial positions remain unfilled.
Sources: Boletín Oficial, Ministerio de Justicia, Senado de la Nación, Infobae, Perfil, MercoPress, El Destape, El Litoral.
This article was produced by The Rio Times’ automated newsroom system. How we use AI · Report an error
Read More from The Rio Times