The bicameral judge of the intelligence | Ramos Padi …

The day after the Federal Judge Dolores, Alejo Ramos Padilla, presented publicly before the Committee of the House of Representatives' Freedom of Expression, where he denounced the existence of a "network of deputies". large-scale political and judicial espionage ", the bicameral Commission of Inspectorate of Intelligence Agencies and Activities It was unanimously decided to convene the magistrate on Thursday, March 21, in camera. The bicameral president, Radical Senator Juan Carlos Marino, yesterday opened the documentation that Ramos Padilla sent on March 8 – which splashed the prosecutor Carlos Stornelli – and created a subcommittee composed of three legislators from different party blocs. who will badyze its content before the judge's point of view to try to advance in the clarifications. They also decided to summon Gustavo Arribas, head of the Federal Intelligence Agency (AFI), for the following week. Despite "unanimous" decisions, the meeting was the epicenter of a strict ban between the government and the opposition.

Marino was also Bicameral's spokesperson in front of the parliamentary reporters: "It was a very good meeting" with "almost perfect attendance", he said, before complaining. this president who did not call the judge. I do not work for a media show, it's a serious and responsible commission that does things when it has to do them, "said the senator of the pampas, who had rejected a week earlier the" pressures "exerted by opposition legislators Ramos Padilla "We can not speak for badumptions. All possible responsibilities must be applied. We are absolutely respectful of justice. The least we can do is mix one power with another, "Marino responded to the question about Ramos Padilla's denunciation of the existence of a" para-state espionage ring " .

"This is the first time that a federal judge is asking to appear before the Bicameral Intelligence Commission. And whenever anyone asks for it, we will receive it," added Marino, recalling that at the time, they had received Miguel Ángel Toma and Oscar Parrilli.

The president of the FpV-PJ senate bloc and member of the Bicameral, Marcelo Fuentes, gave another political interpretation of the bicameral treatment to the magistrate. "The exhibition of Ramos Padilla to the deputies has demonstrated the institutional seriousness of the investigation he leads, which is the key to summoning him, given the systematic refusal of the ruling party," Fuentes told Página12 .

The meeting was not in the kind tone described by Marino. Kirchner's lawmakers were not content with opening the 4,000-page boxes sent by Ramos Padilla – which basically had the same content as the deputies – and asked for the magistrate to be summoned. The idea of ​​macrismo was to arm the subcommittee, a preliminary report and just to mention the judge.

The Kirchner insisted on the call to Ramos Padilla and, in the midst of difficult discussions, the invitation was approved, with the possibility that, in the course of a reserved meeting, the judge could provide "sensitive information". The same thing happened during the summoning to Arribas: the opponents asked to know what role the AFI filled before a parapublic device dedicated to espionage and intelligence.

"The aim was to delay Ramos Padilla's call until they managed to eliminate the case, and in that sense there was the disqualification of the prosecutor (Carlos) Stornelli, the presentation against the judge of Dolores made by the ruling party in the Judicial Council and non-cooperation in the investigation, "Fuentes insisted in front of the newspaper.

The sub-commission was integrated by Senator Pedro Guastavino (Justicialista) and Deputies Daniel Lipovetzky (Pro) and Rodolfo Tailhade (FpV-PJ). She will badyze the contents of the boxes and prepare a preliminary report for the meeting with the magistrate. At the same time, also unanimously approved the quote of Arribas, that his opponents claim for almost two years. Until now, the chief of espionage had refused to attend the Congress and had proposed meetings in his office AFI. Legislators insist that it be in the "institutional sphere" of Parliament. It will be necessary to see if Arribas returns to put objections to answer before the Congress.