The Kirchnerist offensive against Conte Grand founders in the Legislature and is concentrated in Congress
In the province of Buenos Aires, the departure of the attorney general, Julius Conte Grand, is a stated goal of the governor Axel Kicillo. With the broadcast, at the end of 2021, of the video of a meeting at the Buenos Aires headquarters of Banco Provincia in which the former Buenos Aires Minister of Labor Marcelo Villegas spoke of a “Gestapo” to end the unions, the provincial ruling party announced a impeachment request. But the effervescence of that presentation in the Buenos Aires Legislature subsided and, as the days went by, the strategy foundered due to the lack of opposition support. With the impeachment trial in the province cleared from his horizon, for the moment only a definition awaits the prosecutor in Congress: the final report to be produced by the Bicameral Commission for the Oversight of Intelligence Organizations and Activities, chaired by deputy Leopoldo Moreau.
In early January, the Frente de Todos bloc in the Buenos Aires Chamber of Deputies held a press conference to present its request for impeachment against the prosecutor, whom it accused of being part of a provincial “judicial table.” The session that enabled a new re-election for the mayors was fresh and the ruling party was betting on harvesting wills among the wounds of the Together bloc, which voted dividedly on the changes in the law that it had sanctioned Maria Eugenia Vidal in 2016. But the opposition buckled down, supported Conte Grand, and the impeachment strategy was frozen.
“The Frente de Todos bloc called for impeachment. There are not enough votes for that, they are two thirds. To create an investigative commission it is a simple majority, but it is necessary quorum before and two thirds to deal with the subject on tables”, stressed to THE NATION a legislative source by exposing the impossibility of advancing the ruling party.
A Peronist legislator admitted that the Conte Grand issue “got stuck” in the Legislature. Without votes to accelerate, he affirmed that he sees no chance that extraordinary sessions will be convened. “I don’t think there will be sessions until March,” he considered.
Parallel to the failure of the political trial, an investigation remained open in the bicameral Congressional Intelligence Commission involving the attorney, in which he declared on Thursday, without convincing Kirchnerism and with questions on his part about the legality of the call. That investigation will lead to a report on the alleged Cambiemos judicial table in the province of Buenos Aires.
“When we showed a part of the Bapro video, in which Villegas says that for the preparation of cases they have the support of the Attorney General, of prosecutors, of the organic structure of the Attorney General, we asked Conte Grand and he denied that the Attorney General was involved in these maneuvers. We played the video two or three times. The contradiction between Villegas and Conte Grand was raised, and we quote Villegas for Wednesday because one of the two is missing the truth “, Moreau told THE NATION.
“We also list six cases of prosecutors who depend on their orbit and who participated in the assembly of cases. He said he was unaware of the cases and that he was going to investigate. It seemed unbelievable to us,” added the Kirchnerist deputy, who indicated that he asked Conte Grand “why he was the only provincial prosecutor who had an encrypted telephone number from the AFI” and that the prosecutor replied that “they gave it to him at a meeting of the AFI and put as an argument that he participated in meetings by the G-20″.
At the end of the investigation, the bicameral will make a report. “We will bring it to the attention of Parliament. If crimes appear, we will report them. We will send the statements to the courts because they are indicative,” Moreau summarized.
Conte Grand introduced himself, but stated that the procedure is irregular. In their environment they indicated that “the key is not the questions or the answers, but the irregularity of the procedure”. They argued that the prosecutor denied the intervention of the Prosecutor in the preparation of cases, explained that the structure of the Prosecutor is always available to prosecutors, and that the encrypted telephone was given to him in relation to the G-20 and, by not using it , He returned it”.
In a letter addressed to Moreau, Conte Grand questioned that he was not allowed to testify in writing. It stated that there is a “violation of due process of law due to ignorance of the institutional guarantee of declaring through reports that attend the investiture of the Attorney General” and pointed out that this prerogative is included, among others, in article 165 of the Federal Criminal Procedure Code.
“We had a crossing of notes. He told us that he relied on the prerogative to testify in writing and we told him that this applied only to him in the province of Buenos Aires. The Intelligence law is of a federal nature and he could not not attend, “said Moreau before the consultation of THE NATION.
Conte Grand’s objections also included that the summons did not specify “its object or the matter investigated” and that “the members of the subcommittee or the person responsible for the investigation were not indicated.”