On the telephone of the lawyer Luis Hermosilla, investigated by the Audios Case, conversations were found between the regional prosecutor of Aysén, Carlos Palma, and Gonzalo Migueles, partner of the Supreme Court minister, Ángela Vivanco, which took place in middle of the last national prosecutor election process.
Over the weekend, a new case was revealed that calls into question the independence of the Judiciary. This is a conversation between the regional prosecutor of Aysén, Carlos Palma, and Gonzalo Migueles, partner of the Supreme Court minister, Ángela Vivanco, which took place in the middle of the last national prosecutor election process.
Specifically, Ciper Chile released the chats, which were obtained from the phone of the lawyer Luis Hermosilla, who is being investigated for the so-called Hermosilla Case, or Audios Case.
According to what was published by the media dedicated to journalistic investigation, Migueles offered to finance Palma for a doctorate and leave him in charge of the North Central Metropolitan Prosecutor’s Office, which is currently directed by prosecutor Xavier Armendáriz.
All this, as long as Palma gave his support to a candidate for national prosecutor, which only required ratification by the Senate. Likewise, Gonzalo Migueles would have taken steps to influence the election contest for the Conservator of Real Estate of Viña del Mar.
“This may be even more serious than the Hermosilla audios”
Faced with this situation, the former president of the Council for Transparency, Francisco Leturia, asked himself “who is this man with the ability to negotiate, to offer important positions, to offer doctorates? Who does he work for? On whose behalf is he do you make the arrangements? This may even be more serious than the Hermosilla audios. “Here we are talking about how the most important positions in the State are negotiated and how they are obtained.”
For his part, the former president of the Association of Prosecutors, Pedro Orthusteguy, commented that “it is worrying that it is finally confirmed, from time to time, that the appointment of our highest authorities, who go through the filter of various institutions for their appointment , a crossover of influences from different actors, sometimes institutional or extra-institutional, is observed.”
Likewise, the criminal lawyer and former prosecutor, José Antonio Villalobos, added that “this warrants all types of investigation by the prosecution, to know what and what tenor these conversations are and to see if there is any type of configuration of a crime.”
Vivanco’s response
After the investigation published by Ciper, Minister Vivanco, through a statement, indicated that she did not participate “in any way” in the reported events, and that the article is full of “prejudices” and “errors.”
“Under the appearance of a serious investigation, reports are published full of statements, prejudices, intentions and even errors that seek to affect a member of the Judiciary by discrediting and attacking members of his family that have nothing to do with his functions” , he added.
Along the same lines, he added that “it is not possible that just because a person is the brother, son, partner or spouse of a magistrate, a blanket of doubts and accusations can be spread over him or her.”
In addition, he attacked the medium, ensuring that “it is also not possible for a specific medium to take over functions that belong to constitutional bodies, determining when and how to leak real or false messages, added to its own interpretations about them, even more so when “They belong to formal investigations in progress or are presented as such.”
Questioning the Judiciary
The political reactions to this new case that calls into question the independence of the Judiciary were immediate.
Representative Flor Weisse (UDI) expressed that “if what is questioned are the influence and recommendations, we must investigate and advance in the reform of nominations of judges, prosecutors and notaries.”
Meanwhile, his counterpart in the Lower House, Daniel Manouchehri (PS) pointed out that “the Hermosilla chats are a Pandora’s box, which is exposing a true network of corruption.”
Check all the details in the full note.
On the telephone of the lawyer Luis Hermosilla, investigated by the Audios Case, conversations were found between the regional prosecutor of Aysén, Carlos Palma, and Gonzalo Migueles, partner of the Supreme Court minister, Ángela Vivanco, which took place in middle of the last national prosecutor election process.
Over the weekend, a new case was revealed that calls into question the independence of the Judiciary. This is a conversation between the regional prosecutor of Aysén, Carlos Palma, and Gonzalo Migueles, partner of the Supreme Court minister, Ángela Vivanco, which took place in the middle of the last national prosecutor election process.
Specifically, Ciper Chile released the chats, which were obtained from the phone of the lawyer Luis Hermosilla, who is being investigated for the so-called Hermosilla Case, or Audios Case.
According to what was published by the media dedicated to journalistic investigation, Migueles offered to finance Palma for a doctorate and leave him in charge of the North Central Metropolitan Prosecutor’s Office, which is currently directed by prosecutor Xavier Armendáriz.
All this, as long as Palma gave his support to a candidate for national prosecutor, which only required ratification by the Senate. Likewise, Gonzalo Migueles would have taken steps to influence the election contest for the Conservator of Real Estate of Viña del Mar.
“This may be even more serious than the Hermosilla audios”
Faced with this situation, the former president of the Council for Transparency, Francisco Leturia, asked himself “who is this man with the ability to negotiate, to offer important positions, to offer doctorates? Who does he work for? On whose behalf is he do you make the arrangements? This may even be more serious than the Hermosilla audios. “Here we are talking about how the most important positions in the State are negotiated and how they are obtained.”
For his part, the former president of the Association of Prosecutors, Pedro Orthusteguy, commented that “it is worrying that it is finally confirmed, from time to time, that the appointment of our highest authorities, who go through the filter of various institutions for their appointment , a crossover of influences from different actors, sometimes institutional or extra-institutional, is observed.”
Likewise, the criminal lawyer and former prosecutor, José Antonio Villalobos, added that “this warrants all types of investigation by the prosecution, to know what and what tenor these conversations are and to see if there is any type of configuration of a crime.”
Vivanco’s response
After the investigation published by Ciper, Minister Vivanco, through a statement, indicated that she did not participate “in any way” in the reported events, and that the article is full of “prejudices” and “errors.”
“Under the appearance of a serious investigation, reports are published full of statements, prejudices, intentions and even errors that seek to affect a member of the Judiciary by discrediting and attacking members of his family that have nothing to do with his functions” , he added.
Along the same lines, he added that “it is not possible that just because a person is the brother, son, partner or spouse of a magistrate, a blanket of doubts and accusations can be spread over him or her.”
In addition, he attacked the medium, ensuring that “it is also not possible for a specific medium to take over functions that belong to constitutional bodies, determining when and how to leak real or false messages, added to its own interpretations about them, even more so when “They belong to formal investigations in progress or are presented as such.”
Questioning the Judiciary
The political reactions to this new case that calls into question the independence of the Judiciary were immediate.
Representative Flor Weisse (UDI) expressed that “if what is questioned are the influence and recommendations, we must investigate and advance in the reform of nominations of judges, prosecutors and notaries.”
Meanwhile, his counterpart in the Lower House, Daniel Manouchehri (PS) pointed out that “the Hermosilla chats are a Pandora’s box, which is exposing a true network of corruption.”
Check all the details in the full note.
