Attorney General’s General Secretary Edwin Quispe said Thursday that the prosecutor’s announcement on the election fraud case is “final” and that the Organization of American States (OAS) statement on the case is preliminary “and” aims to lead us into conflict.
The State Department official referred to the OAS statement, in which the panel confirmed that there had been “malicious manipulation” in the October 2019 elections to favor then-MAS candidate Evo Morales.
“The OAS intends to lead us into a field of conflict by saying that the authorship is unknown, it is an irresponsible act from our point of view,” Quispe told Unitel.
The Secretary General confirmed that the prosecution “will not debate or comment on documents without a technical basis, and even less are elements or arguments likely to be contrasted with material elements responsible for the veracity or non-truthfulness of the proclamation.”
He assured that the Federal Ministry would allow the dissemination of political issues in this way and that the institution would concentrate on the “technical, legal and procedural areas”.
“Any other document is provisional and supplementary. In procedural form, it is not appropriate to do any kind of assessment, “he said.
He claimed that the OAS preliminary report “did not have the technical components” and that therefore the opinion was requested from the Bisite group of the University of Salamanca, which found no “manipulation of the results” in its final report, although it found serious shortcomings Has.
He pointed out that the Spanish consultancy’s analysis met all the requirements related to “specific expert points”.
In its statement, the OAS pointed out that the expertise of this Spanish group was “poor” and “contradictory” and “not comprehensive” and that it was not carried out on site, but only with data provided by the public prosecutor’s office.
Regarding the binding nature of the OAS report, Quispe claimed that there is “no contract” obliging the state to comply with the mandatory test and that the requirement made by the state for this study in 2019 was “in the political arena” and not legal.