Minister of the Environment, Adrián Peña, claimed to have a university degree that he obtained years later

Colorado Party satisfied with Adrián Peña’s explanations in the Ethics Commission

Adrián Peña and the controversy over his university degree.
Adrián Peña and the controversy over his university degree.

This Monday, the National Executive Committee (CEN) of the Colorado Party (PC) met in its usual weekly meeting, which continues to be through the Zoom platform. On this occasion, the report prepared by the party’s Ethics and Political Conduct Commission was addressed, in which the case of former Environment Minister Adrián Peña was analyzed. As will be recalled, Peña resigned from his position when it was discovered that he had lied about his bachelor’s degree.

At the end of the report, the commission recommended “declaring reprehensible the events that occurred in the past and the warning in relation to the future trajectory”, as established in paragraphs a and c of article 139 of the Organic Charter of the PC. However, it is the National Convention of the party that will finally decide on the application of the sanction, according to what is established in the same article.

Citizens see it as a minor thing

Sources from the Ciudadanos sector, to which Peña belongs, assured the press that they agree with the report and the recommendation of the Ethics Commission, so there will be no problems in this regard. In addition, they highlighted that the warning does not have a great impact, since it is like an “observation” that does not change anything in practice. It should be noted that article 139 contemplates other tougher sanctions, such as the suspension of affiliation, the request for resignation or removal from party or public positions held on behalf of the Party, and expulsion.

For their part, leaders of the Batllistas sector opined that the commission’s report is quite harsh, taking into account that it is an ethical breach, although they recognize that a warning is the lowest sanction. They assured that the warning is an observation that remains as antecedent, in case there is a second behavior to study. In his opinion, the sanction suggested by the Ethics Commission is appropriate, since the matter “did not deserve more.”

Source link

Previous Story

Dilemma Arthur: neither Liverpool nor Juve want him

Next Story

Free Dialogue: Government tries to improve noise supervision

Latest from Uruguay