Opaque politics

The degree of privacy protection and the degree of publicity of bureaucratic activities are parameters that measure the strength of a country. For this reason, the Political Constitution of the Republic of Guatemala (CPRG) guarantees the right to privacy. Article 23, on the inviolability of the home, and Article 24, on the inviolability of letters, documents and books, are the two pillars of the right to privacy. In order to invade a person’s home or correspondence, the authorities must obtain a judicial authorization, which must be issued in accordance with the law and not at the whim of any official.

Article 25, on registration of persons and vehicles; 31, on access to state archives and records; 32, to improve the framework for people’s privacy rights for the purpose of subpoenas.

Articles 29 and 30 are the basis of the State’s duty of accountability to society. Article 29 guarantees free access to courts and State institutions, while Article 30 imposes liability on public institutions, providing that all administrative actions are public. The only exceptions are matters of foreign or national security, as laid down in the Law on Access to Public Information (LAIP). It is important to emphasize that, in any case, the principle of maximum openness, as provided for in Article 3 of the LAIP, must be followed, which also mentions the simplicity and speed of the access procedure. However, this rule is violated when cumbersome procedures are established for access to public information and all obliged subjects must disseminate this information ex officio.

(frasepzp1)

The LAIP also sets standards for defining confidential information and withholding information. However, in clear abuse and misuse, some institutions, as subjects of obligations under Article 6, decide to hide information that they are obliged to make public. The Constitutional Court (CC) and the Supreme Court (CSJ) arbitrarily decided to hide information related to their security costs. Disclosing this does not affect their security, as no access is requested to the deployment, methods or strategies. It is about knowing how much tax-paying citizens spend to protect the people, equipment, vehicles and devices that manage the justice system that corruption has brought us.

Recently, the icing on the cake came from the Public Ministry (MP), which refused to report the amount of salary and salary increases set by its boss, Consuelo Porras, since he assumed his first term in office at the Public Prosecutor’s Office. . Protected by the figure of article 23 of this law, the MP hides information related to the income from taxes paid to the Attorney General. This text explicitly states that the information will be considered confidential when its dissemination “… could cause serious damage or prejudice to the investigation, prevention or prosecution of crimes related to national or national intelligence procedures” to the administration of justice.

None of this applies to understanding how the Attorney General’s wallet has become fatter after six years as a member of Congress. Knowledge of this data will not affect the investigation of any criminal or judicial matter.

That is, when Porras, as well as the Central Committee and the Supreme Court, are subjects that are obliged to be accountable to society, their actions take the form of opaque policies. And, as the opaque Consuelo Porras often repeats, no one is above the law, and that includes the responsibilities she bears.