translated from Spanish: Complaint against Subdere for “feasting” with missing detainees

Government redundancies during 2018 remain a headache for the authorities of ministries and undersecretariats as well as for the State Defence Council (CDE), which has had to carry out appeals by affected officials. Among these cases, the Undersecretariat for Regional Development (Subdere) had to reinstate three officials, one by supreme court decision and one by the Comptroller General.
However, these decisions are not the last ones to be circumvented by the Subdere. The 1st Labor Court of Letters is awaited to resolve a complaint filed by an initialS D.D. official, dismissed on July 13, 2018. A “delicate” case, they explained from the undersecretariat, as that person – who had entered the distribution in 2014 – would have been dismissed as a result of a political persecution by one of his direct chiefs, who had arrived with the current government of Sebastian Piñera.
His departure came after he reported to his superior a fact that occurred on June 14, 2018. On a field trip, according to the lawsuit, “an allusion was made to a tribute that the driver made in the presence of the current undersecretary (Felipe Salaberry) to the escort of former President Pinochet, even coming to speak in festive tone of the political detainees that would have been launched from helicopters to make them disappear.”
This conversation would have affected him, as his parents were persecuted and exiled during the dictatorship and he himself had been subjected to arrests and assaults during that period. He later reads the complaint, would have let his boss know about his annoyance and then, on July 10, he was notified of his dismissal.
In the CDE’s response to the complaint, it was emphasized that between the complainant and the Subdere “there was never an employment relationship or link of subordination or dependence, since, as she herself points out, she was appointed from the beginning of the link with that said Ministry, it was always under the form of “contract”.” She added that “the term of the whistleblower’s public service is denied. Similarly, it is expressly denied that the disengagement was for political reasons. In this sense, it is not effective that acts of political discrimination have been carried out, nor that the complainant has been affected by his work after expressing his opinion, an accusation that has no sustenance.”
Finally, the CDE stated that “it is not effective that the disengagement has been carried out in an offensive manner, nor that it violates the honor of the actor, violating rights and guarantees protected by our legal system”.
His case is commented to date in the Subdere and adds to other “irregular” practices reported by officials before the Comptroller and Justice. Moreover, there is a case in which they denounce the “arbitrary” closure of a summary in order to “deceive” the Court of Appeals, so that it did not give way to the request of another official, entered in March 2019.

Original source in Spanish