The governor of Santiago del Estero, Gerardo Zamora, warned in an interview with Télam that “there is a collusion” between the Supreme Court and the government of the City of Buenos Aires, while questioning Judge Horacio Rosatti for assuming “roles that he did not correspond”, but also considered that the president of the highest court is not “in moral conditions” nor does he have “the legitimacy” to continue in that position.
Regarding the bid for the funds that updated the historic controversy between centralism and federalism, Zamora pointed out that although “today federalism is in conflict” at the same time Argentina is experiencing “a conflict of powers” because “there is a Judiciary, a president of the Court, who is assuming roles that do not correspond to him”.
“There is, on the part of the opposition, an idea that it is better for Rosatti to govern”warned the Santiago president.
This is how he referred to the exchanges held through Telegram between Rosatti’s main adviser, Silvio Robles, and the former Buenos Aires Minister of Security and Justice, Marcelo D’Alessandro, messages in which the former gave advice to the latter for the dispute between Together for Change and the Frente de Todos for the integration of the Judicial Council.
Zamora, with a growing prominence in recent weeks, received Télam in his office, where he also spoke of the Court’s ruling on co-participating funds, of the chats that involve the leadership of the Judiciary, of the complaints he received from the opposition and the upcoming presidential elections.
– You raised your voice in defense of federalism, with accusations and strong retorts. How do you assess what has happened since then?
– The discussion of co-participation and CABA has to do with a medium and long-term agenda. It is a problem of more than two centuries: the formation of our nation and the asymmetry that has occurred due to a lack of federalism. Our federal country has often had moments, decisions and sometimes also conflicts, from unitarism. Centralism has had a lot to do with decisions: Buenos Aires centralism. And I’m not talking about the porteños as inhabitants of that space of little more than 200 km2, but coincidentally about what is concentrated there.
– Do you consider that you were attacked for speaking out in the name of federalism?
– Yes, but that’s not a problem either. There are 200 years of history that has been like that and will continue to be like that from Buenos Aires centralism. The provinces underestimate us. Santiago del Estero is the sixth province with a trade balance in a positive dollar, and what is the City of Buenos Aires? The last province and the worst with a negative balance. It’s not even a province. And it doesn’t produce anything. How can it not have a negative balance if it does not produce anything? However, when one listens from there to political opinions, journalistic analysis, when one looks from there with that Buenos Aires prism, they practically tell us that they support us.
– The opposition says that this ruling by the Court does not affect the provinces.
– Another of the many lies of centralism. In a conflict of interest, the first thing to kill is the truth. Imagine, the national budget that is in force includes works, housing, routes, roads. From that mass that belongs to everyone, the national government redistributes. If we take 200,000 million out of there, doesn’t it affect us? Of course. The certificates of works, housing, national works stop being paid, and this happens in almost all the provinces. We have 6,000 homes under construction, almost 2,500 are with national funds. Do the workers of the Uocra have to watch how the money goes to the banks of the city of Buenos Aires, to the coffers of the banks of the city of Buenos Aires, and we have to say “it’s okay, because the rulings are like that do we have to comply with them? No, it’s not like that.
– That money would come in handy for the drought, I suppose.
– For all things that the national government must invest in the country. To give an example, Santiago del Estero has 134 thousand km2, the northern territory is a third of the country’s continental surface. The Bajos Submeridonales are equivalent to more than 100 thousand km2, while the City of Buenos Aires is 200 km2.
– This week special sessions were finally convened to deal with the impeachment of the members of the Court. What should be the steps to follow?
– It is a constitutional mechanism, of article 53. We do not attack anyone. We go with the law and article 53 allows us. It is already in the hands of Congress. The opposition even says that this is a coup or something like that. They have already put about 10 impeachments against the President. Article 53 is a faculty that anyone has, but it seems that only the PRO has it here. The PRO can impeach, the ruling party cannot. They demand that the ruling party withdraw the impeachment, otherwise they will prevent Congress from working. That is not responsible.
– You, as governors, what do you expect?
– We are going to wait for the legal proposals, which will have to be resolved. Reconsiderations, challenges, revocation of a precautionary measure. Because in addition to everything that is legally against the constitutional precepts, (the decision on co-participation) has no budget, does not provide for a budget. On the other hand, (the Court) took parliamentary powers: because if one annuls a law, the previous one must remain, and the previous one is 3.5% (by the co-participation coefficient for CABA, NdR), Macri’s decree . But since they do not dare to leave it in force, parliamentary powers are taken. We do not know under what criteria, because it is a precautionary measure, and they say “let’s start in the middle, 2.95”. Well, if that is the decision and that decision succeeds, they are implicitly saying that during 4 years 500 billion pesos in constant currency were stolen from all Argentines. Because between 3.5% and 2.95% the same Court is recognizing that there was an excess in Macri’s decree.
– Is there a coexistence between the Court and the government of the City of Buenos Aires?
– There is a collusion, which I denounced criminally, or a possible collusion, because I cannot say that the crime is configured. Because no one is guilty, they are always innocent, until proven otherwise. But the chats that came out, that have not been clarified, nor have they been denied by the Judiciary, the truth is that they imply collusion. Because the spokesman for the Court (by Silvio Robles) chats with the Minister of Justice (D’Alessandro) and they say how the ruling will be, even in a joking way, and the ruling comes out that way. Obviously, there is a collusion. And that is one of the causes of the impeachment of President Rosatti.
– You filed a complaint against Robles that was passed on to Comodoro Py. How will it continue?
– And… how all things end in Comodoro Py. Unfortunately, it is Commodore Py.
– Will you continue the complaint in some way?
– I already did what corresponded to me as a citizen, as a man from Santiago, as a governor. Because it affects the interests of my province and because there could be a crime in between. I made the criminal complaint, now it is already in Justice. Why the despair of going to Comodoro Py? Rosatti, president of the Court, when he was mayor (of the city of Santa Fe), had a criminal complaint for illicit enrichment. A process in which the federal judge declares himself competent because it is the place where he committed the illegal act. But at this moment he is in a Chamber of Cassation of Comodoro Py. And the president of the Court, in addition to the fact that the chats involve him, is president of the Council of the Magistracy. In other words, the chambermaids who are going to resolve depend on him. So, contrary to how it is carried out here (by sending the complaint against Silvio Robles to Comodoro Py) so that something against it is not investigated, it is carried out with the inverse criterion of where a former mayor should be investigated.
– Do you think it affects the functioning of the Republic?
– Exact. To summarize, I do not believe that the current president of the Court (by Rosatti) is in a moral condition or has the legitimacy at this time to continue being president of the Court. With this I am not asking you to resign or anything. Let him be impeached, but he doesn’t have the legitimacy. There is, on the part of the opposition, an idea that it is better for Rosatti to govern. But that’s what Congress and the Executive are for, who were elected by the people. Rosatti is for something else. He is assuming powers that do not correspond to him and he is also suspected of collusion in two fundamental facts: in co-opting the Council of the Magistracy and arranging a court ruling in favor of one of the parties.
– How do you see the intervention of the President of the Nation on this issue?
– You have already taken the powers, you have raised all the resources. The President has been quite clear: even if there is a ruling, which is also precautionary, it can be revoked. We hope that the Court will revoke it because that would change everything. And a solution space will open up. Because if I say “deposit that money”, but there is a law called the Budget, which is the mother law, which tells me this money is for this and not for this, which law do I comply with? To the law or to an order that goes against the law? That is conflict of powers. The powers of the President are the powers of the President, the Judiciary cannot go against the law. They cannot force me to comply with something in which I am committing a crime. We are in a complicated situation, this has never happened.
