Sociologist Ramon Tejada Holguin writes in today’s El Caribe, questioning recent statements by Secretary of the Presidency Danilo Medina in which he claims that the government has had to set priorities and choose between prosecuting corruption or governing, and that the President has chosen the road of governance. Tejada says that governance should not be not a synonym for impunity. “Impunity is what the government is allowing with its misguided policy of not prosecuting corruption that occurred in the past,” he writes He is critical of the government corruption-fighting department, Depreco, for preparing cases that are deficient and destined to be tossed out in court.
He also speculates that the message this sends is for the opposition to not prosecute corruption in the present government, either. He says that this has become a terrible spiral, where all who have a little bit of power will demand the right to remain untouchable in the name of misunderstood governance.
He protests about the fact that he continues to sit on a government committee whose aim is to promote ethics and design programs to fight corruption. “If corruption is not to be prosecuted, what is the point in this committee?” he asks.
He points out that the PRD has weakened, and that the prosecution of corruption bears political fruit, so it would make political sense to prosecute past corruption. “Maybe the problem is that to effectively fight past corruption will mean that they will have to fight the present corruption, and that would be a problem for the PLD,” he concludes.