Juan Carlos Tafur: “Either the prime minister’s departure was due to psychological problems, or not a single competent professional accepted this position”

Director of the Journalistic Portal greaser, Juan Carlos Tafur questioned ratification from Hannibal Torres before the Presidency of the Council of Ministers (PCM) and considered that his resignation last Wednesday could be part of the “psychosocial”.

“I think that (ratification) raises suspicions that post availability announced Anibal Torres (…) was nothing but psychosocial, designed to divert attention about the judicial misadventures of the president against the prosecutor’s office,” he said in Saturday Focus.

In this regard, the journalist noted that “all news departments” were “committed and dedicated” “wide base cabinet” announced the head of state, forgetting “suspicions of corruption” for which he was summoned to the prosecutor’s office last Thursday.

“I think it ended up confirming that everything seemed to be (psychosocial) because what happened last night it is sainete that deepens the crisis instead of alleviating it (…) I think it was crappy smokescreen This has led to a change of minister, which will not only not resolve the crisis, but will aggravate it,” he said.

Tafur explained that the “hypothesis” is that, indeed, the prime minister and the president”they shared”psychological, given the” ambiguous letter, which did not express an irrevocable resignation, which was appropriate, “or that after the resignation of Torres, the president did not find a replacement.

“It is very difficult for a competent, autonomous professional with a technocratic approach, accept a commission today from a government that is so discredited or retains power quotas (…) in that atmosphere, in that political ecosystem, it is very difficult for a person with technocratic abilities and professional independence or high professional skills to take a ministerial position,” he explained.

Disturbing changes

As for the new appointments in the cabinet, Tafur believes that this is just a “castling of ministers”, which in some cases “They are unhappy and even anxious.”

“For example, the case of the Castilian former Minister of Housing, now Minister of Transport (…) Or the swearing in of Mr. Rodriguez McKay at the Foreign Ministry. (In) his article published on July 8 last year (…), he blames Sagasti for a political fiasco for allowing Mr. Castillo to be sworn in and electoral fraud. And (…), yesterday he knelt before what he considers a fraudulent president,” he said.

Also director Mr. greaser doubted the “existence” Alexander Salas in the cabinet and the appointment of a new minister Betsy Chavez.

“The sustenance of Salas, who just throws the ministerial castling into position where you don’t know anything, and knew nothing about Culture. The swearing in of Betsy Chavez in the office where you know absolutely nothing and this is very important, because it is necessary not only to support Grand National Theateris to pursue an intercultural policy of indigenous peoples,” he said.

In addition, Tafur considered Kurt Burneo, appointed Minister of Economy, “lack of political vitality” given the current financial situation in the country.

“Ideologically, he is someone who will not doubt, say, increase the budget deficit to revive the economywhich is an urgent problem today because of the financial situation that Peru is going through (…) I think Kurt Burneo is a person who lacks political vitality at the moment (…) I am afraid that (… ) ) MEF will cease to be a bastion”, he pointed out.

He also said that the leadership of Burneo “in ideological terms” will not contribute to “giving investors more confidence”, but, on the contrary, will “discourage them even more.”

Congressional inaction

On the other hand, Tafur questioned whether the Congress really “Won’t do anything” face to face with the political crisis that the new cabinet may represent.

“Congress is not going to question the new cabinet, leave it, they screwed up in the office (…) They are unwilling to push for elections, which I believe would be the best political solution for a situation like the one we are facing (…) They closed their eyes in their seats,” he said.

This inaction for Tafur would be due not only to the preservation of his parliamentary salary, but also to the fact that “Congress became lobby and interest group pressure which bring more economic benefits than compensatory ones”, which would force congressmen to “keep their post”.

The journalist also considered that the National Prosecutor’s Office, conducting investigations against the head of state, “the maximum that it can count on” is to bring charges. constitutional complaint against the president.

“If Congress does not release him, this constitutional complaint will die on the shore, it will simply remain there (…) So, we are up against the wall of Congress, which he is not going to release him because he has no votes, he does not find enough political agreement so that it flourishes (…) No solution comes from this side either,” he explained.

According to Tafur, the only thing that could “pressure” Congress to “make the decisions that it should have made” is mobilization.spontaneous’ rather than those caused by the ‘right’, whom he described as lacking clarity.

“What is the motto of the organizers of these “megamarches”, in quotation marks, because there are only 500 people: no to communism, no to fraud. In other words, questions that people are not interested in, because this government is not communist, it is not statist (…) And, in addition, they put a stable composition Lourdes Flores, Jorge del Castillo, Raul Diez-Canseco which absolutely no one motivates to go. So that’s not the point,” he said.