In the third chamber of the Supreme Court, on Monday, allegations were made about the return of former Under-Secretary-General Dorothy Pérez, who, according to a judgment of the Santiago Court of Appeal, had to return on October 16 because her removal of charges would have been unlawful and arbitrary.
The argument raised this morning at a court hearing was appealed against following a decision by the National Defense Council on behalf of the Court of Auditors to prevent Perez from resuming his duties.
On August 20, Jorge Bermúdez, the controller, accused Perez of loosing confidence when she was summoned to testify as a witness to the Milliard fraud in the Carabineros. Then he asked him to step down, to which she refused. In any case, after 48 hours, the controller announced his vacancy and nominated María Soledad Frindt as an alternate.
In this new and final trial, Maraudio Eugenia Manaude, Chair of the State Audit Office, said that this decision should be ineffective because it is based on subjective facts.
In this regard, the lawyer explained that it is incorrect to point out that the decision is arbitrary: "arbitrary discrimination is justified by the decision not to demand the resignation of other controller officers who were summoned to testify in a criminal investigation into the Carabineros fraud. Of course, the senate has no reason to state whether there is arbitrary discrimination, or not, because he can not know what the circumstances of each official who was summoned to testify. "
In addition, the President of the CDE said that the rules that have changed over time and refer to this kind of departure have not been fully reviewed. He added that it was unacceptable that such a great deal had happened because he argued that his publication in the media had caused great harm to the state institution and that much of the massive increase in information in this case was blamed by Dorothy Pérez.
Maria Eugenia Manaud said that if this position is indelible it would be the only case in Chile that has this kind of privileged situation. Even the President of the Republic, neither the power of the state nor the institution of state administration, as well as his most distinguished rulers, are not so privileged that they have to assume the status of life that even a new controller must make, which he can not be his subordinate of trust. "
For his part, lawyer Dorothy Perez, Ciro Colombara, stated in his argument that the prosecution was an integral part and insisted that the decision of the Court of Appeal, adopted in October, should be maintained.
The lawyer said that the controller had repeatedly changed his motivation to request a resignation from a former sub-contractor in his various press releases, so he called his behavior biased.
Moreover, he referred to Bermudas himself, in which, as an academic, he stated that "the controller, together with the sub-manager, has the prerogatives and immobility specified by the judges of the Court".
"This academic title is written in Jorge Bermúdez Soto's book General Administrative Law, Third Edition Updated 2014," explains Colombara after reading his appointment. "Academician Bermúdez Soto, on the contrary, points out what Bermúdez Soto made to the controller," he said.
The lawyer dismissed that Perez's positive judgment could have affected the correct performance of the controller, as he argued that his representative had an excellent attitude to return to his work with Bermúdez, as he did in all his years of public service.
Before the trial, Jorge Bermúdez was convinced that this process was calm and confirmed that he would not leave the post, even though the Court's ruling was against him.
In its turn, the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court agreed to this case and it is expected that in the coming weeks there will be a definitive decision against Dorothy Pérez's future work.