For the second time, a constitutional judge denies a request for access to the information requested in order to fully understand the Letter of Intent that was signed between the Ecuadorian government and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), for a line of credit for $ 4.2 billion.
In the Family Judicial Unit of Calderón, to the north of the capital, the request for access presented by the exvocal of the Council of the Judicature, Angelica Porras, and the jurist Richard González, against the President of the Republic, Lenín Moreno, was rejected. and the State Attorney, Íñigo Salvador.
Angelica Porras acknowledged that they “feared” that the refusal would be the response they received, but despite this, said that they will appeal the decision. “We hope that someday we will have access to the agreement that the IMF has signed with Ecuador to know how much we have committed, how much money has come, what will be used, what is the interest, what is the deadline pay, how many months are grace, that we need to know, “said Porras at the end of the hearing.
For the refusal of the request, explained the complainant, it would have been argued that the request should be addressed to the Minister of Finance and not to the President of the Republic. understandable to say of Porras, because in a previous hearing on the same subject it would have alleged that the petition was misdirected because it was addressed to the Minister of Finance and not to the President of the Republic.
“We are going to appeal because we consider that he is the president of the republic, Lenin Moreno, according to article 9, who has custody of these documents and it is necessary that he deliver them. We as citizens are asking for access to this information.
“The first request for access to information was made by the Ombudsman’s Office against the Ministry of Economy and Finance and was intended to know the contents and annexes of the Letter of Intent approved on March 11. Alexandra Almeida, of the Ombudsman’s Office People, explained that it is important to have access to this information, because it was necessary to know what is the final and complete text of the Letter of Intent.
Despite the arguments presented, on April 9 a constitutional judge denied the request for access to information, arguing that the requirements of the Organic Law of Jurisdictional Guarantees had not been met and because the required information was delivered in a timely manner and complete. (I)