New Immigration Decree, Long Life To King Macri!

By the way, a lawyer of Immigration showed up at a citizenship case I won and made an appeal because he got an arrest order for deportation and he was trying to reverse the granted citizenship.
I interposed an habeas corpus that I won, I made a criminal complaint against him for abuse of power and I asked for the nullification of the appeal.
Today they informed me at the Federal Criminal Court that the Prosecutor accused him so the case is on.
 
By the way, a lawyer of Immigration showed up at a citizenship case I won and made an appeal because he got an arrest order for deportation and he was trying to reverse the granted citizenship.
I interposed an habeas corpus that I won, I made a criminal complaint against him for abuse of power and I asked for the nullification of the appeal.
Today they informed me at the Federal Criminal Court that the Prosecutor accused him so the case is on.
Who was the lawyer who made the appeal? I don't mean his/her name, but was it a private lawyer? If so, what legal standing did he/she have to make an appeal? And what motivation would have to make an appeal for this person's citizenship? I would have thought only a lawyer for the government (e.g. a fiscal) could be the opposing party in a case for citizenship?
 
Who was the lawyer who made the appeal? I don't mean his/her name, but was it a private lawyer? If so, what legal standing did he/she have to make an appeal? And what motivation would have to make an appeal for this person's citizenship? I would have thought only a lawyer for the government (e.g. a fiscal) could be the opposing party in a case for citizenship?
It was a lawyer of the staff of the DNM.
He use civil private legal arguments plus he assert they have the right to deport him [even he is already argentine but still racially asian].
There are not opposing party in citizenship. The prosecutor’s duties are regarding to control the judge respect the CN.
Only after granted only the Prosecutor can start a cancellation of citizenship trial.
 
I won the appeal on my client who was illegally deported. The Chamber ordered the judge to enact the decision without the finger prints granting or denying the citizenship ASAP.
 
So this just means a decision needs to be made not necessarily that the judge will rule in favor of the person. The end result could just be citizenship denial?
 
So this just means a decision needs to be made not necessarily that the judge will rule in favor of the person. The end result could just be citizenship denial?
This is not a linear reasoning.
The nazism in a Court procedure means to avoid a sentence to be enacted because, then, you can appeal and win.
So, this is a leading case where the chamber ordered to enact the decision. Judges cannot be ordered about the content of that decision.
 
If the judge was resisting to make a decision, then my guess is they will write it (by force of higher court decision) to reject it. So, then you will have to appeal the decision? Sounds like this will be a challenging case. Hopefully the court nazism will stop someday.