The result of this Sunday’s referendum generated noise inside the PIT-CNT. On the table this Tuesday, the role of the police union and the possible responsibilities for the defeat will be under discussion.
Sergio Sommaruga, general secretary of the National Union of Private Education Workers (Sintep) and member of the Representative Board, told The Observer that although not all the members have the same position, there is a group that understands that the position of Sifpom (the police union that makes up the secretariat) “had an impact” on the result of the referendum.
“There are many people who voted for the articles because they believe that it is a tool to give them more security. That the police union responds to them, I think it did a lot of damage to the Yes campaign, Sifpom’s position,” he explained and added: “It is a union that has a significant volume of members and it is each member and their family. So there it multiplies. There are other unions that have had a different position with the government, but Sifpom is an ally of the government, a strong ally of the government and that is attested to by permanent decisions such as defending (Luis Alberto) Heber, defending the operations of the Ministry of the Interior, never questioning any order, never questioning any operation. It is a union that is hardly different from its boss, it is the ally of his employer.”
In addition, he complained that the union – whom he criticizes for its actions and not for ideology, according to what he said – did not abide by what was resolved by the representative table. “The majority cannot crush the minority, but the minority, when it is, has to respect the majority and they did not do it and that caused damage that is visible. I think we have to discuss it,” he said and assured who will raise the issue this Tuesday in the executive secretariat, in which the president of Sifpom, Patricia Rodríguez, participates.
Police union sources told The Observer that already on Sunday night, through WhatsApp groups, members of the PIT-CNT accused them of being a key part of the shipwreck of the Yes. Despite this, they hope that at the end of the campaign “the anti-police handle will drop” that they detect among their co-religionists.
The vice-president of the PIT-CNT, José Lorenzo López, clarified this vision. “The union movement made a great display in all its militancy, which is the normal militancy that it has historically. The police union has never been based on its particularity (…) It did not influence not only because it had a neutral or favorable position to the LUC but because due to its characteristics it does not contribute anything,” he said, referring to the impossibility of the police officers to pronounce themselves politically.
Asked if the statements of the leaders of Sifpom – who affirmed that tools present in the law served them to better carry out their work – could have influenced the result, he said: “It is possible, but I have not done the fine analysis.” In any case, he complained that “what is clear is that they spoke out against the organic definitions of the PIT-CNT.”
Among the promoters of the Yes, public security was a workhorse during the campaign. The complaints of police abuse and the succession of unclear events —which culminated in a search of the Parque Paladino stadium in the middle of the ban— were the main points. On the day of the elections, the president of the Broad Front, Fernando Pereira, lowered the tone of the matter and said that they were “minor” episodes but that the serious thing was that they happened one after another and that it had to be stopped in time.
In his conference for the victory of the No, the president, Luis Lacalle Pou, thanked the Police and pointed out that “they were used unfairly” in the campaign. The discussion about public security was one of the main and most critical during the months of debate. Within the law that was challenged, it has a privileged place: the first chapter. From the No command and the police union with the most members (Sifpom), the favorable result was interpreted as support for the police.
“Very true,” union leader Fabricio Ríos summed up on his Twitter account, along with an excerpt from the president’s video in which he sent his “personal” support to the troops. “The Uruguayan people expressed themselves democratically. Despite the cruelty, the citizens decided, in terms of security, to give a vote of confidence to the National Police. To continue providing the security that the people need, with the necessary guarantees, the order is not to loosen !”, Vice President Patricia Noy Cardozo stated, using the phrase used by the late Interior Minister Jorge Larrañaga.
The Ministry of the Interior goes for the night raid
In the Ministry of the Interior, where the victory of the No vote was also read as support for the administration, they are already looking at other possible reforms that before might seem resisted, but that in light of the results have popular support. Among them, the law of night raids, according to the director of Security and Coexistence, Santiago González, to The Observer on sunday night. One of the seven objectives that the ministry had set for this 2022 is to deepen the battle against drug trafficking and sources from the portfolio indicated that it is a key tool to combat drug dealers and the intention is that it resurface on the parliamentary agenda as soon as possible. soon as possible.
At the legislative level, it had been the National Alliance senator Carlos Camy who had proposed it. According to what was stated by those consulted, the initial idea is to explore the options established by the article 331 of the Constitution. There are raised the possibilities to reform or eliminate part of the Constitution. This is because the possibility of searching at night is prohibited by it. This resource was submitted to popular consideration, among other measures, in the plebiscite “Live without Fear” carried out in 2019 and promoted by Larrañaga. It failed with 46.83% of the votes.
