CGR Questions 13 Appointments by Piñera’s Deputy Secretary Alfonso Vargas over Legal Compliance and Conflict of Interest

Original article: «No se ajustan a derecho» y «conflicto de interés»: Cuando la CGR cuestionó 13 concursos a exsubsecretario de Piñera, Alfonso Vargas

In 2012, during the first term of former President Sebastián Piñera, the General Comptroller’s Office (CGR) raised objections against 13 appointments for department heads made by then-Undersecretary for the Armed Forces, Alfonso Vargas, a member of the Renovación Nacional party.

The reason? It was discovered that the selection processes were manipulated to favor the then-authority of the Ministry of Defense, who ultimately imposed their chosen candidates.

To carry out this maneuver, the management of Piñera’s ex-subsecretary arbitrarily set requirements and percentages for the applications, as indicated in the ruling.

«It is observed that given the number, nature, and valuation assigned to the desirable conditions of the aforementioned Stage II, these became criteria that excluded candidates who only met the legal requirements to fill the contested positions. Moreover, since in most cases those selected were serving as substitutes in the roles for which they were elected, it can be assumed that these were directed to secure the nomination of specific individuals,» states the document.

Additionally, the CGR pointed out a serious conflict of interest, noting that «the Head of the Budget and Finance Division was part of the selection committee, given that two of the selected individuals had previously worked with him at a municipality, and besides serving as substitutes in the positions they were elected to, they had also worked together.

In this regard, the Comptroller’s Office determined that «it was appropriate that he should have been disqualified from intervening in any actions related to the contest, which certainly must be kept in mind going forward.»

In conclusion, the oversight entity represented the 12 resolutions appointing department heads at the third hierarchical level «given that the criteria for each of the contests that led to the designations contained in them, did not comply with the law.»

The Citizen