Mauricio Macri, during his presidency, had raised by decree the co-participation of the City of Buenos Aires to 3.75%.  Photo: Clarin.
  • Post author:
  • Post category:News
  • Post comments:0 Comments

In the midst of the tussle with the Supreme Court of Justice over the composition of the Judicial Council that the ruling party maintains in the Senate, the Executive Power is alert for another definition that will be taken by the country’s highest court in the coming weeks: if the Court accepts the precautionary measure of the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires to restore the federal security funds, assigned when Mauricio Macri Was president. These items were cut by the government of Alberto Fernández in 2020.

Mauricio Macri, during his presidency, had raised by decree the co-participation of the City of Buenos Aires to 3.75%. Photo: Clarin.

The Minister of the Interior, “Wado” by Pedro, already expressed his concern. “Journalistic reports anticipate an alleged ruling by the Supreme Court in favor of the discretionary and illegal transfer of funds that Mauricio Macri gave by decree to Horacio Rodriguez Larreta to the detriment of the development of the provinces and their inhabitants”. The minister left floating a suspicious question: “Funds in an election year?”. Yesterday, when asked by this medium, from the Interior press office, however, they said they had “no contact with the Court”, so they were not aware of the “imminence of the ruling” or “the content” of the same.

Last March 10 was the last public hearing of the representatives of the Nation and the City, before the Supreme Court to try to reach an agreement. Silvina Batakis, later a minister for a few weeks and now president of Banco Nación, went as an employee of the Ministry of the Interior. Felipe Miguel, Rodríguez Larreta’s chief of staff, represented Buenos Aires interests. There was no agreement.

The controversy revolves around the percentage of funds transferred to CABA, which went from 1.4% of the co-participation to 3.75% during the Macri presidencylater reduced to 3.5% by that same Government.

On September 9, 2020during the coronavirus pandemic and through Decree 735/2020, President Alberto Fernández ordered that this percentage be brought back again to 1.4%.

Later, the national Congress approved a law that ordered a negotiation between the parties to define the amount to be transferred, while indicating that the money would not correspond to co-participating funds. The City appealed, then, to Justice, with a substantive claim and a precautionary measure to suspend the cut.

Journalistic versions indicate that in the Buenos Aires government they expect a favorable ruling on the precautionary measure against the removal arranged in 2020.

The cut in funds to CABA had the support of 17 ruling party governors at the time. “We have to recover these funds from the Nation, because in the same security area, there are many provinces that also need them,” said the governor of Santa Fe, Omar Perotti.

The governor of Santa Fe, Omar Perotti, spoke out against expanding the co-participation for the City of Buenos Aires.

The governor of Santa Fe, Omar Perotti, spoke out against expanding the co-participation for the City of Buenos Aires. (Government of Santa Fe/)

For the governor of Chaco, Jorge Capitanich, “the interference of the Court tends to generate clear favoritism towards a jurisdiction that is the richest in the country, the one that receives the most resources, the one that receives the most resources, as a result of the establishment of companies and national organizations, severely exacerbating the asymmetries”.

“If the Court were to rule in favor of the City of Buenos Aires, they would be destroying federalism,” said the governor of Santiago del Estero, Gerardo Zamora.

Although the position of the pro-government governors was as expected, the PRO was unable to align the radical governors, partners in Together for Change, after their demand.

According to reports from the Buenos Aires government, the cut in funds is close to 200 billion pesos.

Leave a Reply