Graciela Ocaña spoke before the pro-Government concentration in networks #21A and criticized the legislators still keep their parliamentary privileges, qu (e) prevent that Cristina Kirchner is halted.
“The sense of meaning in the Constitution, which was enacted for two centuries is not the sense currently given to the fueros”, said the Deputy.
Charters exist to ensure the division of powers and avoid that legislators be prosecuted or pressured by their work in the Chamber to which they belong.
In that sense, he was emphatic when discussing the possibility that are carried out the raids ordered by Claudio Bonadio, unable so far by these jurisdictions.
#21A I’m going. It is important that we are all present to claim the end of impunity; the impeachment of Cristina and the expiration of domain for assets stolen by corruption and drug trafficking. pic.twitter.com/TamMBdyrnh – Graciela Ocaña (@gracielaocana) August 19, 2018 “cannot be in a basic question as it is a RAID need to have authorization from Congress or intervene telephones, in the case of judicial inquiries “, he pointed out.
In this way, Ocaña was in tune with the project presented on Tuesday by the Deputy of change Gustavo Menna, voiding the need for parliamentary authorization to move forward with searches, interception of telephone calls, between others.
Finally, the legislator to change called the law of extinction of domain in the Senate, concerned with urgency since in his opinion it is a “central tool in order to recover the stolen goods”.
“But we must also warn that there is a project that promotes the Peronist block, in charge of Senator Pichetto, who returns to a scheme which makes it impossible to quickly recover the stolen money, because it says that there has to be a firm conviction,” warned.
Ocaña is in the eye of the storm as he was the first member in the list to change in the elections investigated by trucho financing, where hundreds of humble people who are listed as contributors denied having given a weight.
Extinction of domain Cristina impeachment #21A
