The former president said that the decree he signed to force state insurance companies to contract with Nación Seguros sought to ensure that premiums did not end up in the hands of “foreign companies” and that it expressly provided that there should be no intermediaries.
The former president Alberto Fernandez filed a brief in the case Insurancewhich, he claims, is a “political persecution directed by the criminal justice system.” In this context, he said that the accusations are “ambiguous and unfounded.”
Fernández made his statement through a 48-page document that he presented to the federal judge. Julian Ercoliniwhich was written in the first person, but also bears the signature of his lawyer Mariana Barbitta. The former president said that the decree he signed to force state insurance companies to contract with Nación Seguros sought to ensure that premiums did not end up in the hands of “foreign companies” and that it expressly provided that there should be no intermediaries.
In turn, he mentioned that the State departments that agreed their policies with the broker Hector Martinez Sosahusband of her former secretary Maria Canteroand other firms, did not hire “insurance producers” but rather insurance advisors.
What does the document submitted by Alberto Fernández say?
“The most serious thing is not the attempt by those who exercise politics – in a mean-spirited way – to use criminal justice as a means of persecution, but that the Federal Justice system automatically accepts those accusations, arbitrarily instructing judicial cases based on statements by journalists and fake news“, he added.
In his defense, Fernandez indicated that The complaint has an economic, libertarian “ideological tone”since “the focus of the complaint is on the ‘monopoly’ in the area of state insurance”, in line with the idea of minimal state intervention in the economy.
He then described the accusations as “ambiguous and unfounded” since “they did not explain what the specific irregularity was, nor the regulations that were breached, much less how the procedure should have been followed.”
“They simply questioned a decree with that ideological-economic view, which is nothing more than a mere opposition to the way of managing the State, but which It does not in any way constitute a crime“He said, adding that contracting with state intervention “is seen as an irregularity.”
Source: Ambito
