Just as the mouse plays while the cat is away, street vendors have taken to the streets again in various markets of the city of the rings. Los Pozos, La Ramada, Alto San Pedro, are some places where no one has been able to relocate despite the attempts, the announced operations, the threats of sanctions and the pale reorganization projects. Everything has failed.
Not only in markets, frequently and vehemently the same landscape swallows sidewalks, streets and avenues in neuralgic points of the most thriving city in the country, Santa Cruz de la Sierra.
The “victims” justify the daring actions protected by sales, however, for the city this behavior generates pedestrian and vehicular chaos, dirt, visual and auditory pollution, hindrance, discomfort and invasion of public space punishable by law. At first glance, the personal interest of a few is imposed before the common good, before the supposed weakness of the municipal order without measuring damages.
Not a few operations or attempts to enforce the law they have had injured officials, brawls and excessive violence. Boldness and audacity seem enormous in some cases. It is common to hear that this does not happen in other cities of the country, however, here “they do what they want”. The question is do they do or let them do?
The complaints of some opposition councilors, such as José Alberti and Manuel Saavedra, point to a political pact between the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) and Solidarity Civic Unit (UCS). That is why the Law of Regulation and the Law of Markets are not complied with, despite the fact that they are shouted before the media and public opinion as workhorses, although it seems more like a Trojan horse, from where the true intentions of the structural problem that the city-market suffers.
Two councilors specifically referred that there are leaders who charge street vendors and then they hand over the proceeds to other officials higher up so that nothing changes, because “it is good business not to put order.”
For his part, the director of Public Space, Freddy Urgel Urgel, recalled last week that there is a policy to recover all spaces and asked citizens not to buy from street vendors. Appeal to the conscience of the merchants and the buyer and continue to watch idly, it seems like a fool’s errand of December 28. One more statement that usually sounds more like a tease.
If the complaint about the business behind the disorder where millions of Bolivians move it is not deepened, we will continue swimming in the misery of chaos and backwardness. It will then be the urgent task of the municipal executive and the elected councillors, in the first instance, to uncover this pot of corruption. Citizen platforms, journalism and ordinary citizens will be able to denounce this problem over and over again, but if we do not act with determination and justice, we will continue in the same situation or even worse.
Nor can the concern be ignored that, if those truly responsible If they continue with this perverse mechanism, they decide to take action on the matter, if very possibly they are the ones who benefit. Can you be judge and party? More than a complex problem, a contradiction is contained that must be definitively clarified for the good of all.
Just as the mouse plays while the cat is away, street vendors have taken to the streets again in various markets of the city of the rings. Los Pozos, La Ramada, Alto San Pedro, are some places where no one has been able to relocate despite the attempts, the announced operations, the threats of sanctions and the pale reorganization projects. Everything has failed.
Not only in markets, frequently and vehemently the same landscape swallows sidewalks, streets and avenues in neuralgic points of the most thriving city in the country, Santa Cruz de la Sierra.
The “victims” justify the daring actions protected by sales, however, for the city this behavior generates pedestrian and vehicular chaos, dirt, visual and auditory pollution, hindrance, discomfort and invasion of public space punishable by law. At first glance, the personal interest of a few is imposed before the common good, before the supposed weakness of the municipal order without measuring damages.
Not a few operations or attempts to enforce the law they have had injured officials, brawls and excessive violence. Boldness and audacity seem enormous in some cases. It is common to hear that this does not happen in other cities of the country, however, here “they do what they want”. The question is do they do or let them do?
The complaints of some opposition councilors, such as José Alberti and Manuel Saavedra, point to a political pact between the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) and Solidarity Civic Unit (UCS). That is why the Law of Regulation and the Law of Markets are not complied with, despite the fact that they are shouted before the media and public opinion as workhorses, although it seems more like a Trojan horse, from where the true intentions of the structural problem that the city-market suffers.
Two councilors specifically referred that there are leaders who charge street vendors and then they hand over the proceeds to other officials higher up so that nothing changes, because “it is good business not to put order.”
For his part, the director of Public Space, Freddy Urgel Urgel, recalled last week that there is a policy to recover all spaces and asked citizens not to buy from street vendors. Appeal to the conscience of the merchants and the buyer and continue to watch idly, it seems like a fool’s errand of December 28. One more statement that usually sounds more like a tease.
If the complaint about the business behind the disorder where millions of Bolivians move it is not deepened, we will continue swimming in the misery of chaos and backwardness. It will then be the urgent task of the municipal executive and the elected councillors, in the first instance, to uncover this pot of corruption. Citizen platforms, journalism and ordinary citizens will be able to denounce this problem over and over again, but if we do not act with determination and justice, we will continue in the same situation or even worse.
Nor can the concern be ignored that, if those truly responsible If they continue with this perverse mechanism, they decide to take action on the matter, if very possibly they are the ones who benefit. Can you be judge and party? More than a complex problem, a contradiction is contained that must be definitively clarified for the good of all.
;
