In recent times, the political scene has turned into a juicy and complex novel that if a Netflix executive had read the script, they would have discarded it for being unbelievable. And no, I am not referring to the flashy series launched by Javier Milei. I am alluding to a less edited and therefore more attractive one. Like chapters, we devoured the chats, photos, audio, and videos that revealed the end of the story of a hero turned villain. The protagonist is none other than the former Head of the Executive, Alberto Fernandez, who by the end of his term had lost his starlight, becoming a lackluster supporting character. Over time, perhaps, he would have been remembered as a flimsy figure, an actor who, due to circumstances, could not develop his full potential. That is, of course, until an incredible plot twist condemned him forever to ostracism.
The events were revealed after Judge Julian Ercolini, in the midst of the insurance case, noticed that on the cellphone of Alberto's private secretary there were chats with Fabiola Yañez, in which the violence exerted by the former president towards his partner was revealed. Despite the former first lady initially rejecting filing a complaint, the images and chats were disseminated later by Infobae. Surprise and indignation quickly permeated Argentine society, and the strongest criticisms fell on Fernandez.
Alberto, who seemed comfortable in the shadows, was brought back to the center of the spotlight by exposing his darkest side. The aggressions directed at his ex-partner, the meetings with various characters, and the videos with lovers deepened the discontent already generated by the infamous Olivos Party and the questioned visits during the pandemic. The evidence was clear; the disdain the former president had for the country's laws and the presidential office had never been so evident.
Quickly, the former leader made vain attempts to mitigate the damage and requested a precautionary measure to prevent the publication and reproduction of his intimate photos and videos, as they would threaten his "name, honor, image, privacy, and/or integrity." What Alberto seems not to perceive is that it is the very essence of his actions and not their propagation that damages his dignity. And that the attempt at censorship only incriminates him further.
However, it seems that the lack of commitment to transparency is a common attribute among Argentine political forces. At the beginning of the month, President Javier Milei signed a decree modifying Law 27.275 on access to public information, enacted in 2016. Through this DNU, the state's discretion in defining what data is subject to inquiry upon a request for information is expanded. A clear distinction is established between public information, which encompasses matters of common interest related to state activity, and private information, related to the domestic sphere of the official. According to this distinction, for example, sharing the income register of individuals entering the Quinta de Olivos could be rejected as it belongs to the private sphere. With the same restrictive spirit, the possibility of initiating legal actions against those who do not make a "good faith" information request is contemplated, giving politicians the opportunity to persecute those, particularly journalists, who ask questions they are not willing to answer.
This type of policy undermines the accountability process, a fundamental pillar of modern democracies. Accountability, defined by Andreas Schedler, a professor and researcher at the Center for Research and Economic Teaching (CIDA) in Mexico City, consists of two notions. On one side, the obligation of officials to provide explanations about their actions, and on the other, the possibility of punishing them if they have violated their duties. It is, then, a mechanism of control and oversight that the people have over power. When proper access to information is hindered, public scrutiny is restricted, or citizen participation is made difficult, the risk of creating a breeding ground where abuses and corruption can thrive undetected arises.
The tightening of accountability led by Javier Milei only consolidates the extraordinary power of "the caste" that he claims to combat. It is paradoxical that a government so intent on fighting against "the politicians" extends its privileges over those of the rest of the citizens, in a context where those in power possess an arsenal of technological tools that allows them to know everything they want to know about a person. Such measures only reinforce the perception that leaders are untouchable beings not subject to the law. However, history has taught us that in the face of ineffective institutional channels that process and channel citizens' demands, they tend to find their own means. Over time, society no longer sends requests or listens to empty excuses, but instead turns into a violent and ungovernable mob that no longer asks for explanations but demands retribution.
Comments