Could Cristina Be Impeached? It’s Complicated

Published en The Bubble

Nisman’s case has given rise to two intriguing story lines: the case of his mysterious death on the one hand, and the cover up accusations he made against Cristina on the other. Due to Nisman’s accusations, which came out after his death, many people have been talking about the possibility of Cristina being impeached. Cristina is still very far  from that, even though she has now been formally accused by the public prosecutor in the case.

An impeachment is a process whereby the President, Vice President or any member of the Executive branch is subjected to trial. The first thing to keep in mind is that this process does not follow the normal legal steps; it is more like a pre-trial that determines whether a full penal trial against these political figures is warranted.

This is because every public official in Argentina (as in almost every Western democracy) has legal protections different from those of normal citizens. These are privileges embedded in the Constitution (articles 68 to 70) and require an impeachment before a regular trial.

So, first things first: Impeachment would be necessary to strip Cristina of her protection. Articles 53, 59 and 60 of National constitution define the procedure. How does it work?

Continue reading

Advertisements

What Really Happened with AMIA? Four Hypotheses

Published on The Bubble

Nisman’s death has captivated the public, giving Argentineans an unexpected reason to follow news during usually-dull January. But the case is just an offshoot of the AMIA bombing on July 18th, 1994. This Jewish center (Argentine Israelite Mutual Association, or “Asociación Mutual Israelita Argentina”) was blown up and still nobody knows who did it. So, what happened more than twenty years ago? These are the hypotheses, counterarguments and main players.

Before we start, what’s the history of the AMIA case?

What happened with the AMIA’s case has been commonly taken as emblematic of the judicial process in Argentina. Why? Because since the investigation started, not only has the case not been solved, but also the judges and prosecutors have been accused of covering up the truth. To give you an example: Juan José Galeano, the first judge on the case, was charged with bribery, destroying evidence, coercing witnesses, illegal wiretaps, and so on.

This is why a special district attorney´s office was created on 2005 by former President Néstor Kirchner, to refresh a stale investigation searching for answers (whatever his political interests were beneath this initiative is beyond the scope of this recap).

Now, let’s go to the hypotheses.

Continue reading