June 5, 2023, 4:01 AM
June 5, 2023, 4:01 AM
How do you analyze the result of your inquiry? Six votes were missing for your censure, how have you received it?
The senators (from Comunidad Ciudadana) raised the appointment and wanted to get me to talk about issues that were irrelevant, that were not part of the interpellatory statement, that made no sense, much less respond to personal attacks or lies from some deputies.
All acts of interpellation are democratic, they may end with the minister’s censorship or not, but in this case Carlos Mesa’s intolerance towards the democratic debate and the responses that were given strikes me, and it is a request that I come Demanding for a long time, that he show his face, that he respond to the country on the issue of Quiborax. Why did he not respond to the call of the judges in the United States when they summon him as a witness about the massacres of El Alto in the gas war (2003), he does not go to any Court and maintains a complicit silence. He is an actor who does not contribute to justice for the victims and what Mesa wants is impunity, his hand will not tremble to attack any senator or deputy who does not follow the whims that he has in the political vision of defense of the Human rights.
Are you referring to Silvia Salame, for the defense and support she gave you in that session?
Not only her, I think that there has been an attack by Mesa on many other assembly members who, for reasons that they will know, did not participate in the session. I think the intolerance of Mesa and the blatant lies of the senators (Citizen Community) Andrea Barrientos and Cecilia Requena (their interpellants) are clear to the country. It has become clear that they did not even know the scope of their questions, they have not been able to support any of their claims.
To what do you attribute the support of Silvia Salame?
to the legal fact. How could a jurist have an answer of censorship when in all the questions that were asked to me, I have responded in a timely manner, in a precise manner, with documents and sentences, bills and norms already approved. I think that therein lies the difference between an obsequious view of supporting Carlos Mesa’s impunity and a view of a jurist who knows the law and has clearly stated her position and her thoughts. He has put forward a legitimate position, all parliamentarians have the right to vote for a decision of censorship or no censorship.
You were heavily criticized for saying that the delay in judicial reform is the fault of the Assembly, is that correct?
The role of each of the State powers is defined in the CPE. This year the Assembly has issued 16 laws, most of them approving credits, $us 933 million and the rest are norms, apart from the Gold Law, that transfer real estate, another changes the name to the University of Pando; from Technical University to Amazonian University, and to approve a Mercosur Agreement.
We have a Legislative Assembly that, with a budget close to Bs 260 million, has issued 16 laws that represent, more or less, $2.2 million per law. It is a Parliament that has to improve its normative production. Nobody here holds him responsible, but he must go beyond scandals, fights, blows. The news should be the normative debate, the political debate in interpellations, clearly its constitutional function is vital for judicial reform, guaranteeing independence in justice.
There are complaints indicating that two of Salame’s sons work in diplomatic posts, and that another of them is his adviser Minister of Justice. It’s true?
No. Regarding the fact that one of Silvia Salame’s daughters works in the Ministry of Justice, I categorically deny it, no relative of Silvia Salame works with us.
And the diplomatic posts?
It is a Foreign Ministry issue, I do not manage the information of all the people who are part of that ministry. I am not denying or affirming it, I simply do not know.
There is a lot of criticism related to the dismissal in the ABC case, what do you think?
The Ministry of Justice is not going to rule on cases that are currently pending before the Bolivian courts. Yes, I must inform you that the declaration of dismissal has been challenged, an appeal was filed against the decision, not only by the Ministry of Justice, but also by the State Attorney General’s Office, by the Ministry of Public Works and by the same deputy Hector Arce (MAS). Let justice issue a decision.
What does the memorial that you presented say?
Look, I reiterate, what the IACHR has recommended to us is that we do not pronounce criteria while the case is pending decision.
Is the audio case different?
In the preparatory stage, in criminal matters, two figures can be given: rejection and dismissal. This is the first. This case was presented ex officio by the Public Ministry after a press conference by Evo Morales, who does not present the complaint like many political actors.
They denounce it in the media, but they do not present their documents or their evidence. He has not been part of the process. On April 28 of this year, the rejection decision was made, notified to the judges and to the actors who were denounced on May 3.
There was no challenge, neither party has filed an appeal. We have not been part of that case. It would have been interesting for Morales to appear, testify in relation to his statements, reveal who delivered the audio, who is the person who gave it, he says he is a local farmer, who can validate the legality of that audio.
Evo Morales has litigated in the media, it is litigated before the courts.
Did you, as a government, think about initiating proceedings, suing Evo Morales, Carlos Romero, Teresa Morales and other actors who denounce through the media and not in the courts?
I believe in freedom of expression, I do not believe that the crimes of defamation, slander and insult can be used to intimidate. The debate must be extensive and sustained with height, with truth, and the population is going to be in charge of giving a sanction without their vote to Evo Morales and those who litigate through the media with lies, to those who make statements that are not true.
Will it then be the sovereign and the vote in the primaries that will punish Evo Morales and his collaborators?
Yes, that is what tends to be followed in a healthy democratic process. Finally, the population is the one that resolves these situations that have arisen in the country, that is what must be expected.
You talked about using electronic handcuffs to avoid preventive detention. Can it be applied to former President Jeanine Áñez and Governor Luis Fernando Camacho?
There I once again take advantage of urging the Legislative Assembly to deal with the bill for the use of electronic handles. We would like to implement these measures, but we need a law.
Politicians detained at this time are not in a position for an alternative to preventive detention to be applied. I remind you that Mrs. Añez has been sentenced to 10 years in prison, she has a sentence that has been issued in our country, which has been appealed and I hope that it can now be resolved in the appeals court of La Paz. She will cease to be a person convicted of the crimes she has committed at the time of proclaiming herself President, the case known as “Coup II.”
In relation to Governor Camacho, I remind him that it is not a single preventive detention measure, there are at least five Bolivian judges who have ordered preventive detention. There are five judicial decisions that have determined the situation and it is completely different from what can occur in other cases.
How long before the resignation and arrest of the former Minister of the Environment and Water, Santos Cruz, did the Ministry of Justice know about the complaints and why did it do nothing?
It was on February 15 that we received Mrs. Carla Cortés, the person who filed the complaint about these events. From that moment on, a review procedure was initiated as provided for by the Marcelo Quiroga Santa Cruz Law, on accounts, and on information in the different public registries. He had a process of a complaint received and a confidential procedure, we cannot comment on it due to the situation that has occurred in this case
Do you have details of how many complaints there are in the Executive Branch in relation to tenders that have this type of anomaly?
We have 828 complaints of different acts under the Marcelo Quiroga Santa Cruz law and around 550 for the crime of legitimizing illegal proceeds, in our case monitoring database. Some of the complaints are almost 50% before courts of justice, others are under investigation, not necessarily a complaint ends in a criminal judicial process, some of the complaints need administrative measures in the Comptroller’s Office.
How many Ministries are affected by these complaints?
It is not broken down because we have processes that are old, that are in the process of being evaluated. There are 828 complaints of corruption of different matters throughout the State. That includes not only the Executive, but governorships and municipalities, and around 550 in terms of legitimacy. We only act in the case of involvement of the highest authorities and in the case of serious crimes, not all.
Are you concerned about the number of cases that may involve corruption in institutions?
I don’t see it with joy, I see it with great concern, but this government has no consideration for the minister of state or for any official who commits corruption. The policy is zero tolerance for corruption and we are going to maintain it in that sense, we are not going to allow it, we are going to go with all the force of the law against it. As the president (Luis Arce) said, we will intervene with all rigor in any case, in which there is proof and evidence that there is an irregularity or lack of transparency in the work of the different ministries.
In the interpellation that was made to him, the case of his brother was mentioned, who has a law office in Santa Cruz and who handles important cases. What do you reply to this?
Lima Asociados is a studio of which I have been the founder, with my brother and other partners. It is a law firm that has more than 25 years of life and is listed by Chamberlain Partners as one of the best in Bolivia. You have known me, Marcelo, before I was Minister of Justice, that is probably one of the five most important law firms in the country. I have resigned before being a minister. I did not accept cases related to the State and I know that they do not either.
