February 25, 2010
Full report:
http://www.diariopuntual.com.mx/?a=detalle&i=57148
It could be called to account before the body which she chaired for several years and which sought to create a public image of straight, honest and firm in his decisions, but reality slowly emerges and is revealed today ever, given the possibility of the head the same force that once applied to several politically disaffected, mostly former presidents municipales.El former head of the Supreme Audit Body, dependence of the Chamber of Deputies of the State of Mexico, is subject to an interesting investigation into the conduct that was unclear about the case of the former mayor of Zinacantepec, Leonardo Bravo Hernández.Como be recalled the PRI Leonardo Bravo Hernandez was the subject of judicial investigation after the Supreme Audit Authority of the State of Mexico (Osfem), then headed by Octavio Mena Alarcón, found sufficient evidence to sue for alleged embezzlement of about 100 million pesos, for which he was first arrested his wife and then él.Al end of the day, the trial was conducted with "medium evidence" provided by the Osfem, as if from the outset the intention was to make "media justice," extent that Mr. Bravo Hernandez and walking in the street as if nothing had happened and property damage is totally done, completely finished, obviously to the detriment of the people of Zinacantepec, which to date and can not recuperar.Pero decades that it's not really the bottom of the current investigation against Octavio Mena Alarcón, although it should, but it is a further issue background, it turns out that property damage, ie 100 million dollars that disappeared from the treasury of Zinacantepec certainly could recover, but for the sake of the former head of Osfem hizo.Aquí just that not to remember an issue of is rarely discussed: the bail system for public servants. According to law the responsibilities of public servants of the state of Mexico and municipalities, all employees federal, state and local governments that spend public funds hands must have a bail fianza.Esa contract at the beginning of the management of these public servants, as if anyone were to take out insurance for your car, ie a fee and is secured to the person for an amount "x" to be applied if this public servant commits a mistake or conduct affecting the público.Traducido to English heritage, this means that if the official misusing public money under his responsibility, then the insurer or surety shall, and shall pay the amount of the policy contract. The policies are in accordance public responsibility and therefore is not the same policy for the mayor or treasurer of the municipality of Tonanitla that they charge premiums for holders of these areas in Naucalpan, Tlalnepantla and Toluca, because they are in accordance with amount of resources available to the municipality and by logic that manages the public official asegurado.Sin But this means that absolutely all civil servants whose responsibility will involve the management of public resources have a guarantee policy that serves as protection against any type of irregularity. So this, then mayor of Zinacantepec, Leonardo Hernández Bravo and as municipal treasurer, Daniel Mortera, had the security bond could well be charged when we saw that there was an irregular handling of public resources in that ayuntamiento.No However, as we know, that money is not recovered and, as said "Don Teofilito" or recover. Why? Simply because the policy was never claimed by Mr. Holder Superior Body Control (Osfem), Octavio Mena Alarcón. Quite simply, Zinacantepec not recover 100 million pesos that evil used in the three years of Leonardo Bravo Hernandez, because the holder of the quiso.Con no control such conduct, Octavio Mena Alarcón is equally or more responsible for financial loss to public exchequer Zinacantepec such as Leonardo Bravo Hernandez or his treasurer Daniel Mortera. They say that "so much sin that kills the cow as he grabs the leg, so the former head of Osfem suspect is also a serious property damage, as it was, according to the judge, administration that led the PRI Leonardo Bravo.La policy was in force, the bond was ready to be reclaimed and thus the possibility of recovering more than three-quarters of the 100 million pesos allegedly Zinacantepec disappeared, but Mr. Mena Alarcón simply did not want to claim, so therefore, would not return to the people of what they had Zinacantepec robado.La logical question here is why would not claim the deposit Mena Alarcón for Leonardo Bravo and Treasurer Daniel Mortera own? No one really knows, because it did not cost any work, was simply to mediate a trade and make a claim for the surety company was the holder of the bond in the case of Zinacantepec.Pero did not. Some say they Mena Alarcón was more rushed in to cover himself back and to achieve a dignified exit for his leadership of Osfem, which solve a serious problem as it was Zinacantepec property damage caused by the administration Leonardo Bravo.Hay be recalled that the former head of Osfem weigh several business-related charges undercover Mena Alarcón wove around his office in Osfem, but that's hardly an issue that check, because even the time is split "magically" all "consultants" had inserted into the municipal payroll for "help" the munícipes to leave them bien.Pero accounts of the bond issue Zinacantepec is an absolutely verifiable, there is policy, you can verify the validity of it, we can see that was in progress the opportunity to claim the bond money, you could restore what was stolen Zinacantepec bad public servants, so that we can see that this was not done simply because Octavio Mena hacerlo.Con it would not, if proved, which is absolutely viable, it is possible Accountability Act apply who for years was the "responsible" to apply, which undoubtedly proved once again that kills iron that iron dies. Yes or no?
0 comments:
Post a Comment