Nicolas Diana
04/26/2021 20:02
Clarín.com
Politics
Updated 04/26/2021 20:02
Pablo Tonelli is one of the
legal swords of the PRO.
The deputy and member of the Together for Change bloc is part of the Justice and Constitutional Affairs commissions in the Lower House and a member of the Magistracy Council, where judges are judged and elected.
From the first day he is critical of the project promoted by the ruling party
- and which already has half a sanction in the Senate - to modify the law of the Public Prosecutor's Office.
"With this project you can appoint any unpresentable as Attorney only with the votes of the ruling party" he complains to
Clarín
the same day that the Minister of Justice, Martín Soria, went to Deputies to explain it in a meeting that the opposition did not attend .
Why did you decide not to go to meet Soria?
Because the ruling party proposed a methodology alien to the regulations and practices of the Chamber.
We were told that we could only ask questions if we submitted them in writing on the day of the meeting and before 10 in the morning.
It is absurd, not only because it is anti-regulatory, but because the questions arise from what the minister is saying at the time.
If we are forced to ask questions first, the truth is that the meeting loses meaning.
That is why we decided as a block of Together for Change not to attend.
During the meeting, Soria was very hard on the opposition. He said that they "censored the dialogue," that they are "cheeky" and that they "prosecuted the pandemic."
The minister was predictable, he did not say anything new or clear the fears that we have in the opposition.
He dedicated himself to attacking us and the truth is that it is not worth answering him because what he says is more demeaning to him than to us.
His words reinforce our position and the conviction that this law should not be passed.
Is there any possibility that the opposition supports a project to modify the Law of the Public Ministry?
The current project has three points on which we are against. And if they are maintained, we will not vote in favor. One is the reduction of the number of votes to appoint the Procurator. Going from two-thirds of the senators to an absolute majority implies in practice that a candidate who is not suitable can be appointed only with the vote of the ruling party. To an unpresentable. The second unacceptable point is the unconstitutional power given to it by the Bicameral Commission for Monitoring and Control of the Public Ministry. It would be empowered to influence the functioning of the Procuratorate, which is autonomous, thus ending the division of powers. The third point is about the new conformation for the trial court.With the formula proposed by the Government law, there would be fewer prosecutors and more presence of officials and politicians to prosecute prosecutors. The ruling party could remove a prosecutor only with their votes. As long as these points are maintained, it is impossible to sit down and talk with the ruling party.
Was there any government contact to negotiate modifications to the project?
As far as I know there were no contacts to analyze changes.
But would they agree to negotiate if the ruling party proposed it?
Of course.
We will always accept dialogue and we are asking for it.
But on the condition that those three points that we question are modified.
If not, there is no chance of moving forward.
Acting attorney Eduardo Casal is targeted by Kirchnerism.
Photo Juano Tesone.
In Deputies, can the project come out without the support of Together for Change?
Well, if the other minority blocks decided to accompany the ruling party, they could gather the necessary votes.
That is why we are in contact with those blocks and we explain to them the inconvenience of the project and the need for the opponents to stay united on this issue.
And what do they say from those blocks?
Most listen to us, but do not compromise positions.
What do you plan to do from Together for Change if the project goes to the venue without modifications?
We will express our disagreement and vote against it.
We will try to convince the deputies who can influence to join us.
We are going to fight to the end.
This is a hinge law.
It may sound dramatic, but with this law the republic is leaving us because the division of powers, the autonomy of the Procuratorate, and the criminal policy will become the one dictated by a government agency and not the chief prosecutor.
The consequence is that corruption crimes will cease to be prosecuted.
The Minister of Justice, Martín Soria, rushes the plan to appoint his own chief prosecutor.
Photo Enrique García.
Why do you think the government is in such a rush to get the project out?
Because the Government pursues impunity for its members, both those who have already been prosecuted and those who will undoubtedly be prosecuted during the current administration.
The Government wants to ensure control of the events of the past and also those of the present, such as irregularities with vaccines, which is a scandal.
Do you think that behind the project is the influence of Cristina Kirchner?
Yes, but not only from Cristina.
The entire government participates in the desire and need to achieve impunity.
He is also the President.
Because if I didn't participate in those ideas, it would be very easy to resolve the issue.
Those three points that we question from the opposition are taken out, we sit down to talk and in a week we agree on a new law of the Public Ministry.
The President participates in this search for impunity.
He is as responsible as the vice president.
What do you think of the situation of the current Attorney Eduardo Casal? He has been on an interim for more than three years.
It is a bit irregular, but it would have been solved if the Frente de Todos gave the agreement to the candidate proposed by Mauricio Macri (Inés Weinberg) at the time or if the ruling party promoted the appointment of Daniel Rafecas, the President's candidate.
The ruling party has done nothing to promote his appointment.
He did not even call the audience where he has to speak.
If they are so concerned about the situation of Casal that they do something, that they promote at least Rafecas's candidacy or that they propose another candidate.
Do you think that Rafecas is a good candidate for the Procuratorate?
It deserves to be considered.
But for that we need the ruling party to convene the hearing and it can be examined and its antecedents analyzed.
