A quick response to some of the questions raised in the comments to my article "The appointment of Bruno Stagno"
- The date appointed Bruno is irrelevant if the incoming government agreed to the appointment. And Laura and Don Rene Dona had publicly expressed his desire to appoint Bruno at the UN. So there is no bad intention or desire to impose anything on the new government, just the realization of a desire expressed by the President.
- I repeat, the appointment was made by the Governing Council, who is empowered to do so. What Bruno did was sign the agreement for the appointment, executing the will of the Council. That's an oversight, but does not mean a breach of ethics or that Bruno was "self-appointed" como lo siguen manteniendo algunos periodistas. No hay abuso de poder si no se tiene el poder de nombrarse. No puede haber conflicto de intereses por ejecutar un acuerdo de un órgano superior. Lo que hay es una omisión de tipo administrativo que estoy seguro era subsanable, tal y como lo expresa el actual Canciller.
- El nombramiento de Jorge Urbina ante los organismos internacionales acreditados en Holanda (ratificado por el actual Gobierno, lo que confirma que no hay ninguna irregularidad en el mismo), no se hace para "acomodar" a Bruno. A Jorge se le vencía el nombramiento ante la ONU si mal no recuerdo el 1 de junio, por lo que igual había que nombrar un sustituto. Y la Presidenta y el nuevo Canciller expresaron su deseo de que el que to that post was Bruno. So the Governing Council appointed him.
What I wanted is to provide factual information. There are errors of errors. What you need is to put things in perspective and not to tarnish the honor of a person as Bruno Stagno of sheer ignorance of what really happened.
0 comments:
Post a Comment