28 jun. 2012
When guarantees are jaqueadas Democracy
Uruguay has joined a proprietary process nature of totalitarian governments. From the beginning, as we have observed from many points of view of democratic institutions in Uruguay for the ruling party are merely a political speech at the convenience of the moment.
Not long ago, and despite two successive times the people said no to the repeal of the amnesty law of the State's punitive pretension is delegitimizing the way I look that decision. And using a mechanism flagrantly unconstitutional "was reinterpreted" the much-touted law in their majorities Reinterpretation literally went up the decisive majorities of the people said NO twice.
Today they evoke the majority of the people in a fact that has to do with a sister country: Paraguay and the Removal of Fernando Lugo as president.
The severity of the arguments from our country can not be left ignored.
On behalf of the Government of our Republic Foreign Minister, Mr. Almagro said regarding the legitimacy of the current President of Paraguay and therefore the inauguration of his government:
"The foreign minister said what, technically, the situation in Paraguay is" an institutional breakdown, which does not have constitutional rights to depose a president elected by the people. "Before that says why our government supports this view: "It recognizes the existence of impeachment in the Constitution of Paraguay, but this does not mean it is considered constitutional mechanism used, as it lacks the guarantees of due process. These guarantees require longer periods to implement the defense, and to implement the declarations. There should be on the way previous decisions or judgments, as in this case. "
And it had previously stated: "the natural stability of the decisions of the people, the only sovereign is to be preserved through the democratic clauses in the region."
The seriousness with which we face is that no matter if the Institute is intended or not in the Constitution, but, since his thinking, our government and of course the accompanying this outrage to democracy and the legality and legitimacy of democratic processes, "from your thinking I repeat: that there are guarantees of due process should have been given more time, which from the outside of Paraguay and its laws, it is thought proper.
The government that many Uruguayans have given their majorities for the democratic exercise his lack of interest provisions in the Constitution of Paraguay, or the declaration of a democratically elected Parliament, and the declaration of legitimacy that gives "The High Court Electoral Justice of Paraguay "
He says "It recognizes the existence of impeachment in the Constitution of Paraguay, but this does not mean it is considered constitutional mechanism used, as it lacks the guarantees of due process. These guarantees require longer periods to implement the defense, and to implement the declarations. There should be on the way previous decisions or judgments, as in this case. "
Given these statements have to say (as some time has left behind the plural the singular of the speaker):
1) The impeachment is a constitutionally valid instrument in Paraguay because the Constitution establishes
2) Parliament resolves his dismissal ensuring the requisite majorities in its implementation.
3) Himself impeached and criminally, but politically accept the rules you set in spite of wanting to rely on the declaration of unconstitutionality before the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay, whose argument he states that since the request does not cover that as a policy instrument is the impeachment of its jurisdiction and therefore can not act.
But despite all these "facts" about legitimate constitutional and other purely political character who quit without support, our government decides to join an unlawful act: Suspend to Paraguay and not allow its reinstatement decision of Mercosur and UNASUR for something very simple truth: the Broad Front government was abrogated the right to stipulate what the deadlines which should give another speech in another country and with other rules.
The Broad Front government decides to be judge and jury. And states that it recognizes how valid any democratic instrument but agrees to "their feeling, thinking" so that Uruguay is who should be questioned within Mercosur, being investigated undemocratic exercise of his government.
OEA would do well to investigate the events that set the standard for governments to act as our democracy emptied of content and provide real totalitarian government.
Publicado por Bettina Galo en 17:05