Río Negro's Superior Court of Justice closed the action against Law 5755 and its implementing Decree 226/25 on procedural grounds without ruling on the constitutionality of the system for prior, free and informed consultation with indigenous communities. All five judges unanimously upheld the province's objection based on lack of standing and dismissed the claim filed by the Mapuche Tehuelche Parliament Coordinating Committee.
The action was initiated on December 26, 2025 by Carlos Hugo Aranea and Mirta Graciela Ñancunao, werken or spokespeople for the Coordinating Committee. They argued that the rules were adopted without adequate community participation and that the procedure contradicted International Labour Organization Convention 169, the national Constitution and Río Negro's Constitution. Their claim sought to have the consultation framework declared invalid.
The State Attorney's Office responded in May through Luciano Minetti Kern and Ignacio Racca. Its defence did not initially focus on the law's validity but on whether the Coordinating Committee could litigate in that way. It argued that enacting a rule alone did not create a case, controversy or specific affected right because the complaint identified no particular project or state measure affecting a defined community.
The high court adopted that argument and held that an action of unconstitutionality cannot be brought in the abstract. A claimant must demonstrate real and direct harm, either already suffered or imminent, rather than a future possibility. The judges described Law 5755 as instrumental: it establishes the procedure to be activated when the state promotes a decision capable of affecting a community, but does not itself decide matters involving territories or natural resources.
The second ground concerned the chosen judicial route. The Coordinating Committee invoked the Supreme Court's Halabi precedent, which expanded standing in proceedings involving collective rights. The tribunal replied that the standard did not apply because the filing was an action of unconstitutionality rather than a collective proceeding. Months earlier, it had used the same reasoning to remove the Argentine Association of Environmental Lawyers from the case.
The decision did not follow the position of the Public Prosecutor's Office. Acting head Fabricio Brogna López had recommended rejecting the province's objection and allowing the proceedings to continue. Instead, the ruling signed by María Cecilia Criado, Sergio Ceci, Sergio Barotto, Liliana Piccinini and Ricardo Apcarian distinguished between the Coordinating Committee's political representativeness, which it did not question, and its procedural authority to bring this type of abstract claim.
The outcome leaves Law 5755 in force and ends this action without answering the substantive challenge raised by the Mapuche-Tehuelche spokespeople. The judgment also does not say that the consultation procedure is constitutional; it says the issue could not be decided through the action filed and without identified concrete harm. That distinction is decisive: the ruling defines who may litigate and under what conditions, while leaving the law's substantive validity unexamined.
