The senator and member of the Constitution Committee of the Upper House, Rodrigo Galilee (RN), addressed in The Counter in La Clave the failed nomination of martha herrera in the position of National Prosecutor to succeed the questioned Jorge Abbott.
The now ex-candidate started off on the wrong foot as the Constitution Committee recommended rejecting her name by 4 votes to 1. The same scenario she experienced in the Senate, where she obtained only 26 of the 32 votes needed to stay in office.
It may interest you:
Along these lines, the parliamentarian provided the grounds that led him to reject the name of the lawyer and head of the Legal Department of the Prosecutor’s Office.
“Ms. Marta Herrera has held a position of first importance within what is the National Prosecutor’s Office for the last 10 years. She is probably the person who accumulates the most functions within the Prosecutor’s Office,” Galilea said.
“Head of the Legal Unit, head of the Anti-Corruption Unit, she also chairs the committee that oversees the entire integrity system of the Prosecutor’s Office and is also the spokesperson. All these charges were absolutely trusted by the National Prosecutor, she was a trusted person of the prosecutor Chahuán and later throughout the period a trusted person of prosecutor Abbott,” he added.
In this sense, Galilea maintains that “it has been her turn and it was her turn to implement, guide and govern, together with the National Prosecutor, the Prosecutor’s Office. Some may see that as an attribute, in my case I saw it as a problem” .
“If one looks and analyzes the behavior and progress of the Prosecutor’s Office in the last ten years, the Prosecutor’s Office has only worsened its efforts, each time the trials take longer, each time the trials that end in convictions are minor, then it is not I see nothing very remarkable,” added the parliamentarian.
On the other hand, the legislator recalled that Marta Herrera together with former prosecutor Chahuán and Abbott were promoters of the program to strengthen the Prosecutor’s Office, which allowed the addition of almost 600 new officials. However, he assumes that he has not seen progress in that time.
“They promoted it as a necessity to improve all the management indices, and three years later a report was made that is honestly to cry. It basically says that almost nothing can be observed, no improvement, because there is no comparable basis there are no common criteria,” he emphasized.
“I ask myself ‘am I going to entrust this position to a person who has been making decisions for the last ten years, which have been bad, or do I prefer to look for another alternative’, and I answer myself ‘you know that, honestly I prefer to look for another alternative'”, concluded the parliamentarian.
