“I have no problem improving the communication channels so that everyone is informed at the same time.”
With these words the Minister of the General Secretariat of the Presidency (Segpres), Giorgio Jacksonaddressed the criticism of the socialist senators to the government’s decision to put “extreme urgency” to the project of amnesty law for the so-called prisoners of the social outbreak.
The socialist parliamentarians criticized that they were not informed of the determination and that the Secretary of State did not look for alternatives so that the project was approved in the Upper House, where there is no consensus on the initiative and there is a risk that it will not prosper.
“This is not how things are done, it is not enough to give a project urgency, even more so if that decision is not discussed with the different groups”asserted the PS through a statement.
To this was added that one of the members of the bench, the Senator Fidel Espinozaaimed the darts directly at the head of the Segpres, ensuring that “It is a crafty act for Minister Jackson to try to install this debate in the Senate knowing that he does not have the votes.”
“As we discussed yesterday (Monday) and as we announced together with Senator Fabiola Campillai, who made us the request last week so that this project that was modified in the Constitution Commission to achieve greater transversality can be voted on in the room . Before announcing this request, we discussed it with the heads of all the caucuses, of the Chamber and the Senate at the lunch we held yesterday in La Moneda, including the PS caucus, with whom I am going to meet tomorrow”, Jackson responded, putting on the table that the Socialists would have been notified of the determination.
Jackson also explained that that day “we had a meeting with all the benches in La Moneda where we informed them of the itinerary before communicating it in public, we agreed on some points with them. This point in particular was not an imposition of the Executive, but it was a query that by common agreement all the benches defined that it was important to be able to give it a space in the vote”.
He then added: “I have no problem improving communication channels so that everyone is informed at the same time and not only through their headquarters (…) from the Executive there is all the disposition so that all the benches feel included in the definitions that we are taking, that is what we try to do”.
About the process in the Senatewhich is expected to be difficult considering that the ruling party has 19 votes and requires 26 to approve the initiative, to which is now added the tensions with the PS, the head Segpres was clear in pointing out that “We know that the table for this week is already set, therefore this will be seen following the district week.”
The minister also explained that “the project is much more limited, there are other formulas that the Executive might also implement -one of them has already been approved as the withdrawal of 139 complaints under the State Security Law-, work is being done along that line from the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights and the Ministry of the Interior to detect specific cases that require a certain speed in the processing of trials.”
He also announced that this Tuesday he would hold a lunch with the RN caucus in the Senate, “then with the PPD caucus, tomorrow with the PS caucus and then we are trying to agree with the UDI.”
“We are trying to reach all sectors and you have seen our predisposition, we have not closed ourselves to any conversation, we have tried to open the channels and not close them (…), we are not going to spare efforts in dialogue”concluded.
During the morning -on Universe radio- the minister had also addressed the “catalogue of crimes” that the amnesty would consider.
In this regard, he pointed out that “several crimes related particularly to arms control were left out of the catalog of crimes, which was one of the most sensitive aspects (…), therefore, today the project is more limited, we believe that it is more transversal and, therefore, it might generate a greater consensusgiven that at least he took and collected several of the indications that were made in the commission to reduce the catalog of crimes.
Consulted by those who might access the amnesty, he specified that “Our difficulty is in the quantification of the people who today are deprived of liberty, but there is a registry of regarding 50 people who are at least in preventive detention who have not yet had a trial, many of them have spent a year, almost two years, without obtaining a trial. There is a situation that would undoubtedly generate impotence for anyone who would be involved in this, a feeling that there would be no access to justice, many times these cases without a higher level of evidence, keeping people deprived of liberty due to the connotation they have had some of those crimes.”
