Peruvian President Alan Garcia highlights the differences in social tolerance for corruption among the countries in the region affected by Odebrecht Argentine debt.
In addition to the psychological factor that could indicate the suicide of the Peruvian President Alan García, it is clear that his radical decision took place in a national context in which the gigantic corruption case revealed by the confessions of the Brazilian magnate Marcelo Odebrecht shook the local ruling class. An intensity that seems unusually Argentine, more used to that, as I said to the invisible capo of the business of football, Julio Grondona, “everything is happening”.
The impact of Lava Jato in Peru is very clear from the fact that, in addition to the research that hit Alan Garcia, other former heads of state suffer the consequences of mega-crises: a president had to resign and undergo intensive treatment with a heart attack, another fled to the United States, another prison with his wife and daughter of the infamous Alberto Fujimori (who also remains in prison for other crimes) is entrusted with the custody of alleged corruption for his own election campaign. All this without counting the other officials, governors and mayors in serious judicial problems. Perhaps a relevant fact: Peruvian justice has a special tribunal on corruption.
It is useless to recall in detail the institutional storm that provoked the construction megaescándalo in Brazil itself, with the fall of PT and its main leaders and the prison itself heir to the Odebrecht Empire. The corruption case for public works has also had serious consequences for the very senior officials of other countries in the region, such as Ecuador, Panama and the Dominican Republic. But he draws attention to the neighbors of the other club, although they are seriously affected by bribes. Odebrecht seems to have protected a large part of its leaders from the most severe corruption scandal. The list includes Venezuela, Mexico, Colombia, and Argentina: it would be interesting to present a study of institutional criminology to determine the commonalities in order to explain the shared inequality of these four societies on the culture of culture. ‘impunity.
With regard to the case of Argentina, the international consortium of journalists “Examine Lava Jato” (persistent PROFILE) showed that the Odebrecht dollars had lubricated the larger national institution and deeply reflected the current lawsuits and their modest consequences. . But the lukewarm is not limited to the Brazilian construction company in Argentina. Unlike Peru, in the Senate, they currently live with two former presidents, Carlos Menem and Cristina Kirchner, multiprocessors for corruption. On the other hand, one of the most powerful businessmen in the country and region, Paolo Rocca, has just been desperate by ignoring the bribes that TechNet has paid, a similarity that has led dismissal of the ignorance of the presidential cousin Angelo Calcaterra a terrible country.
Are we Argentineans more genetically corrupt than others? This does not seem to be the case: bribery scandals and various economic abuses by public and private officials are occurring even in the endless Nordic countries. The difference is that the institutional consequences are immediate and irreversible, a likely symptom of much less cultural tolerance to Whitefish’s theft.
In Argentina, it was not possible or not to conclude an agreement for Odebrecht to be able to say everything. And in the case of laptops, it seems clear that only a special court existing in neighboring countries could lead the mega-investigation without the empire half-way, perhaps irrevocably, just like other great scandals where they do not are never paid by exemplary punishments for the ruling class. Another debt waiting both Macri and Cristina, excavators of a crack unpunished.