The review commission of the Constitutional accusation against the former foreign minister, Andrés Allamand, recommended rejecting said libel, for which it will arrive with a negative report at the Chamber of Deputies.
The commission registered one vote against and three abstentions, and did not have the participation of deputy Andrés Celis, who was absent for testing positive for Covid-19, informing through a statement that “he must remain isolated until May 20, without being able to participate in person or telematically in the activities in the National Congress, since he has symptoms that prevent him from doing so.
The deputy and president of the Review Commission, Jaime Araya, argued to Radio Biobio his abstention, indicating that “seeking justice does not mean executing people, and given the tenor of the accusation, it was very difficult to establish a sanction as harsh as the one intended against former Foreign Minister Allamand.”
“Everyone knows that the government of Sebastián Piñera has probably been the worst government in the history of Chile, that the management of the former foreign minister, Andrés Allamand, of his interior minister, Rodrigo Delgado, left us with a deep and disastrous migration crisis,” he said. .
“Notwithstanding these personal trials, it seemed to me that the lack of appearance of the mayors -for whatever reasons-, of the regional governors -except the governor of Antofagasta, who is attending the Constitutional Convention- shows that they had not sufficient background to be able to make a decision to recommend to the Chamber of Deputies that the accusation be approved,” he added.
Likewise, he pointed out that he was struck by the fact that “the eventual infraction of the probity rules that Mr. Andrés Allamand may have incurred was not invoked as grounds for constitutional accusation, since his personal interest in his negotiations could -eventually- have interfered to be Ibero-American Secretary General, evading his duties as Chancellor”.
The defendant in question, the former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Andrés Allamand, responded to the instance filed against him.
Through his defense attorney, Samuel Donoso, the former Secretary of State stated that “the confusion incurred by the accusers is serious: what they really reproach my client for is an alleged abandonment of the duties of the position of Minister of Foreign Affairs based on the fact of ‘not returning to the country’ during the first week of February 2022 or in his subsequent resignation from the position of minister”.
“However, said cause is not established in the CPR with respect to the ministers of State, seeing the accusers in the need to artificially resort to a different argument to justify their claim, invoking a cause that in no case is fulfilled with respect to my client. “, hill.
