[ad_1]
A coin tossed in the air by the Minister of the Supreme Court Sergio Muñoz determined that José Ignacio Vásquez was designated by the highest court to occupy one of the seats of the Constitutional Court. That afternoon of August 31, 2015, who – at that time was head of studies of the highest court – disputed the quota with the academic Eduardo Aldunate. Two draws and had to resort to luck.
Today Vásquez, together with the ministers Iván Aróstica and Juan José Romero, have become the strongest opponents of the presidency of María Luisa Brahm in the organization. Proof of this is what was reflected in the first recital of the sentence by the Law of Commutative Pardons in which the three question in the same ruling decisions made by the lawyer, even accusing her of lack of impartiality. This situation triggered the response of the president of the TC who, in an interview with La Tercera Domingo, opened a floodgate that will be difficult to close, pointing to situations “on the brink of corruption” after she, she claimed, maintained that she had read a contract in which a lawyer charged extra fees for keeping cases suspended and relieved the delay mainly in Human Rights cases.
In audio circles, and even in the Supreme Court itself, the audio of the intervention that Minister Vásquez made yesterday has been circulated. The magistrate appeared in person at the TC, as he had not done in previous days – since the court works via videoconference – and took the floor for 10 minutes to criticize Brahm in harsh terms.
In the audio, which was accessed Third, Vásquez criticizes the president of the TC and says that with the interview with this media he put ministers against him. “It has been unfortunate to have seen that interview, I think that it could not have been done in a more effective way of attacking a part of the current Constitutional Court, its predecessors, the trial lawyers, who are accused of practically exercising functions of corruption, prevarication, supposedly purposely suspending causes ”, starts Vásquez’s speech.
The minister said that he would remember what he had raised when the new president was elected, inviting those who had supported Brahm to take charge of the crisis that had now been caused.
“I am going to remember some words that I said last August, I said … ‘when we are living through difficult times of crisis for all institutions of decline, of principle of authority with consequent loss of institutional legitimacy, with internal fractures and disloyalties, the Leadership, with the announcement of reforms, etc., the leadership of the institution must rest with those who represent in the best possible way, those who are up to the occasion. The president must be the voice of the institution, must speak through its sentences written by it, never from the incontinence of the media or networks. A president must lead the institution, he must stand out for his personal integrity, highlighting the virtues of prudence, temperance and justice. Rationality in their actions, restraint in their emotions, permanent respect for others, good treatment of ministers and officials, ability to unite wills and build consensus, never generating or promoting factions, hatreds or divisions within the institution and the plenary session . And I ended up with ‘the error in a chain of appointments, in the appointment of its members, the constitutional courts, either because of its poor academic or professional accreditation, or its questionable institutional conduct can lead to the discredit of the institution.’ That was what I said, from my point of view it seems premonitory, “he said.
More about Constitutional Court
Vásquez was the second to speak and undoubtedly, according to those present, the hardest, despite the fact that the first to speak in plenary was Iván Aróstica, the former president of the TC and to whom Brahm alluded in the interview with management problems and unintelligible delays when he served as president of that body.
The aforementioned minister did not tremble in personal criticism, including the hiring of the communicational advice that Brahm made regarding the journalist and the National Prize Mónica Gónzález. “The interview that you have given at the bottom (is) an interview tailored not only to your personality, but to what you want to appear, It has dragged the TC to its worst moment, to its most serious crisis, to its absolute blackout, lack of rationality, lack of judgment, of soundness, a communication management absolutely made to measure, “he said.
The former head of studies at the Supreme Court insisted that the interview sought for Brahm to show his personality. “Also with some expressions that as I say seriously undermine the prestige of all of us,‘I believe that the loss of prestige – she says – was basically due to the poor results of the court in fulfilling its functions’EIf this is not the case, those of us who are here know well that the loss of prestige is due to the bad appointments that have occurred in recent years, that is the loss of reputation that has brought. I once said it clearly here. Here it seems that there are leaders of political parties or governments, some got angry -of course- they put on a scared face and says there -paraphrasing the interview- ‘Begins to question an organ that does not fulfill its functions’… I ask myself, please, what are our functions to write sentences, right? … Minister … Do you write sentences? Did you come to work before being elected president on Fridays? ”He said.
In Vásquez’s opinion, the damage to the TC is irreparable and he also questioned the TC president for her past in politics. “I just want to make that present to you. It seems to me that unfortunately his interview took us to the worst moment of the court, it muddies the prestige of the court, the already lowered prestige of the court, drags the absolute de-legitimization of this court and after all the faramallas and all the words he has said in the interview regarding the need to cooperate in the constitutional reform or in the constitutional process in favor of the TC, what is left after this? Is there any TC still standing after this? … Speaking of the third chamber, stating that this court is a third chamber with no idea what a third chamber is, because the third chamber implies that this would be a political body … Or is he seeing his reflection in this?… ”. He paused and continued: “because a third chamber is a political organ, and a TC is a court where there are judges, not operators ”.
He added that “I am very sorry, I hope that some minister, some of the ministers, I think they should be aware of the unfortunate words and unfortunate interview where everything has already been exceeded, all the limits of prudence, temperance and rationality have been exceeded, I find it very serious This is the most serious situation that we are experiencing and it is the responsibility of an interview, in addition, of course, of an appointment that already occurred in past times of an appointment that, as I have just pointed out, unfortunately the person chosen did not meet the corresponding standards that I had to lead the court in difficult times. “
He ended by summoning the rest of the judges and calling on Brahm to resign. “That the ministers who supported that on that occasion remain in their conscience, that their consequences or all the consequences of all this remain in their conscience. The calculations that they may have had in mind, personal, political calculations, etc. Well that is what happens precisely when the institution is not present and is not in sight, when there is no loyalty to the institution. It seems to me that something has been committed here that … this is a true felony, this is a felony what has happened. The disrepute of this court, this court does not rise again, unless there is a decision of the person responsible for taking and declaring that they have made mistakes or simply resigning“
[ad_2]
