[ad_1]
France has given asylum to the Chilean Ricardo Palma Salamanca. Satisfaction of the legitimacy of the fight against the military dictatorship recognized by the country, cradle of democracy. A bitter taste for our institutional situation, because the asylum given in Palma badumes that the Chilean courts do not give sufficient guarantees, which is very worrying for a country that has a history and claims to be democratic.
Our Democracy He has no credibility abroad, for anything it will be. This is the most relevant.
Asking for the repeal of an asylum is worse than a crime is stupid. It is the sovereign right of states to grant asylum, the state of the fugitive can not intervene. The latter state is not part of the asylum process. It's as if you are receiving someone at your home and that a neighbor is telling you that you are going to sue him because he does not like the guest.
Countries as geographically and ideologically distant as Switzerland, Cuba, India and Argentina. Germany and France have refused to extradite Chile to people accused of executing Jaime Guzman.
The government and the UDI must read what is clear: the world understands that it is a just act against a dictatorship that was not over. There is no other reading possible.
Even right-wing governments like Mr. Macri's or Mr. Macron's have granted or maintained asylum to young people. The Chilean right is an international pariah, even in its own sector, the dictatorship of Pinochet is indefensible.
On July 14, France's Day of Feast, the anthem of the Resistance is sung. . This is the dictatorship of Pinochet. Fascism Accept it once and a country will not extradite anyone who fought fascism. They certainly ask, because Chile is imprisoning today the opponents to Pinochet?
The desire to interfere in the system is very large or the ability to badyze very modest, or both at once. It is not possible to otherwise understand the statements of MP Boric on the granting of asylum to the compatriot and opponent of the military dictatorship Ricardo Palma Salamanca.
Guzman was a senator because of a deceptive electoral system that invented him. During the dictatorship, I created legal monstrosities that led to death, torture, relegation, jail without charge and the exile of thousands of Chileans. Guzman did not want the transition, even in the modest way he had benefited, he wanted the political prisoners to remain in his state, he promoted impunity. He was a supporter of the coup knowing that this necessarily led to a mbadacre.
The dictatorship had not ended at the time of its execution, Pinochet was the commander-in-chief of the army, endowed with a staff responsible for the genocide. The Supreme Court as a whole had appointed Pinochet, they controlled the Senate by appointment or election with binomial cheat. The police were full of torturers in exercise. The commanders-in-chief of the armed forces were irremovable. When he was wanted to sue the son of ¨Pinochet, this bullying to the president of the republic and to the state defense council had to abandon the legal action. So you can not talk about senators, democracy, or murder.
The death of Jaime Guzman is not so different from that of Admiral Luis Carrero Blanco in Spain (1973). Both characters were an obstacle to the democratic transition.
[ad_2]
Source link
