Madrid/Osmel Ramírez, Mayarí’s Propist (Santiago de Cuba) and who also collaborates with Diary of Cubawas summoned by the police on Wednesday, one day after having published a complaint on networks against an inspector for his abusive practices. Your message, Posted on Facebook This Tuesday, it was accompanied by a photo of the official, which identified as Barbara.
“I make public my complete repudiation to your way of working, always wanting to damage the private sector to the maximum,” said the man, who runs a cafeteria in the El Cocal neighborhood as a worker on his own and claims to have filed complaints about Barbara to the authorities. “If a fine is 1,000 to 16,000, always puts 16,000. He doesn’t care about anything or anyone, just using his power to harm the one who works and struggles, who has not gone and tries to survive in the middle of too many vicissitudes.” And he said: “People like her hurt more than the blackouts, which is already saying a lot.”
The inspector, she had, had already put her, when she began her business, 45,000 pesos of a fine. “That is the way they have to stimulate the private sector, stimulate us to break,” he lamented. On this occasion, he said, he wanted to impose a sanction of 16,000, Ramírez deduced, “for cigarettes that the dependent has in his bag, as if an inspector had a registration order beyond what was exhibited or taken for infraganti sale.” In addition, continued, “because several hands of large donkey banana were sold and the last one was per small and she assumes that the sold, which did not see, were also below the top price.”
“That is the blockade that does the most, the inside!”
For her, she continued, “it is enough to penalize with such a fine.” And he cried out: “That is the blockade that does the most, the inside!” Pretending the problems that could cause the photo of the official, it was excused: “As inspectors have thousands of laws that shield them from the citizen complaint, I clarify that the photo took it inside my business, not on the street and I was photographing my merchandise.”
Ramírez urged the authorities of the municipality “that this lady is transferred to a job without power to harm people”, because “he can’t stand with that carrier and the pen in his hand.”
Later, in the comments, the proportion explained that finally Barbara did not impose the 16,000 pesos of a fine, but 10,000 to the dependent, being able to have put from 100, “for the cigarettes.” “A 19 -year -old who instead of walking in bad steps is working to help at home, and everyone knows how the thing is with inflation. Of course we will help him alleviate abuse,” he denounced.
And he added a reflection: “Freedom of expression is a right and it is a duty to publicly denounce what we believe unfair. That is why I thought it importantly to make the situation with the abusive inspector. I must clarify that it is not the first time, their abuses, their excesses, their abuses, had denounced it by the established channels and remained there, hurting and without anything that stopped it. Several times I dialogued her. Witnesses, they always look embarrassed with their attitude. Well.
“The publication has gone viral because there is really a very large citizen dissatisfaction with that inspector”
In conversation with 14ymedio This Wednesday, just on the way to the police unit, Ramírez reiterates that the inspector, whom he describes as an “extremist person”, has numerous background of “abusive fines” and not only against him. “If there is a lower and upper range, even if the infraction is lower, the common thing is that it puts the maximum fine, regardless of whether that affects the business,” he reaffirms. The man explains that they are sanctions that can be suitable for MSMEs, but not to small small business owners, who run the risk of disappearing.
By giving the news of his summons, also On Facebookwrote: “Apparently Inspector Bárbara, instead of reviewing her procedure and considering, went to accuse the police for publishing her photo. Certainly, Cuban law is quite rigorous with the publication of photos without prior consent, but there are exceptions, although minimal. And fortunately I can defend myself out there.”
In this regard, it was implemented that it can be protected by article 17 of the Data Protection Law, where the assumptions in which personal data can be published without express consent of its owner can be published: “Given a fact that can potentially damage an individual in his person or property” or “for reasons of general welfare” can be published. For Ramírez, both his complaint and the comments that supported him were leftover evidence “to demonstrate the public utility of the complaint with a photo included, and the damage he does to the goods and people with their excessive fines.”
Similarly, Ramírez tells this newspaper that he does not believe that his work as an independent reporter has motivated the complaint with the police by the inspector. “Many people have taken advantage of my publication to say what they feel and also explained the abuses they have committed against them, state workers as self -employed, and has been a quite remarkable phenomenon, to the point that the police summoned me,” says Ramírez. “The publication has gone viral because there is really a very large citizen dissatisfaction with that inspector.”
