[ad_1]
I had asked for more time Supreme Court, arguing that he was misreported, but decided to respond this Monday. The Minister of Health, Enrique Paris, entered his response to the highest court detailing the reasons why he refused to deliver the emails requested by the North Central Prosecutor’s Office in the framework of the investigation carried out by the prosecutor Marcelo Carrasco, for the deaths related to the Covid-19 pandemic .
The controversy, which reached the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, was unleashed after Paris refused to proceed with the diligence, authorized by the magistrate of the 7th Guarantee Court Darwin bratti, which requested the seizure of the emails of the former minister Jaime Mañalich, from his former chief of staff Itziar Linazasoro and the undersecretary Paula Daza.
Paris’ refusal, he argued, was based on the fact that, in his opinion, handing over that information put national security at risk and violated the privacy of the data that the law on the rights and duties of the patient protects.
In his response, Paris says that the request of the Public Ministry “It is indiscriminate, imprecise and of an excessive scope”. In that line, he adds that the prosecution intends to request all emails “Without requiring a minimum of, at least, relevance with respect to the facts that are the subject of the investigation” and without stipulating a “time frame”.
In the same sense, Paris says that the Public Ministry “It has directly hindered the performance of the ministry that I lead”, since, he added, it must be taken into account that Minsal officials are “Working full time to contain the pandemic, even dedicating part of the day of our officials to extensive statements” before the prosecution.
Then, the head of Health delves into the underlying arguments. As he explains, the requested emails account for the “Adoption and implementation of reserved, strategic and logistical decisions” within the framework of the additional powers granted to his ministry due to the health alert and the constitutional state of exception.
To that, argues Paris, it is added that the context of the pandemic has forced them to acquire medical supplies in an exceptional way, among which are ventilators. These devices, according to the minister’s presentation, have become a well-disputed worldwide “In a context of a true ‘commercial and political war'”. To support this position, the doctor exposes near 20 national and international press articles, that demonstrate the risks of seizures of the planes that carry the fans.
Citing jurisprudence of the Council for Transparency and other legal sources, Paris’s response to the Supreme also states that This international risk that implies the purchase of medical supplies, compromises the security of the country. Along the same lines, in the letter it indicates that the coordination of the Minsal in turn implies “Allocate police and military personnel.”
Finally, he critiques Bratti. According to Paris, the judge “It breached the legal standard required by Article 236 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the resolution that authorized the intrusive diligence.”
However, Salud defends its position, stating that “There is no intention of obstructing the investigation that the Public Ministry carries out”, but it cannot “validate procedural defects.”
