My 32 lines

Last Monday, the main local newspaper (La Gaceta) published a column with the opinion of the Dean of the Catholic University School of Law. There, Gilda Pedicone de Valls stated that the province could be declared an institutional disaster area. That same Monday I sent in a letter to La Gaceta in reply to the statements of the ex-District Attorney under the government of Antonio Bussi [Governor under Military rule, 1976-1981 and Governor elect 1995-1999]. Only today the paper has published only a summary of the text.
What follows is the reply from the Dean, in 32 lines, the same ones she needed to have her ideas in that newspaper.

The Reply
The Dean of the Law School of the Unsta (Universidad Nacional Santo Tomás de Aquino) surprisingly assures that Tucumán could soon be declared as "an institutional disaster area". The affirmation is accompanied by a relative political analysis where the two most relevant political figures are put side by side and assigned equal responsibilities. This is very similar to the arguments of some provincial political analysts; it sounds politically correct, but in my opinion it is not responsible.
That a political journalist or academic categorically affirms these things does not mean they are true.
Lately the opposition has used the concept of institutional quality to criticize the government for any little thing: it was used to disqualify the Constitutional reform, the decree of necessity and urgency, contract renegotiations with the private companies, the regulatory organisms and even the standard pet phrases are absurdly used to attack the words of the Governor.
By employing such banal usage, the opposition is avoiding a serious debate.
Political analysis requires term precision, but mostly putting aside personal whims. There are a lot of people that are angry with politics (and reasonably so) and we all should try harder to reconcile politics with the people, but only if we believe that politics can improve people's lives. Making behaviors relative or terms banal does not help build this path. What it does do is calm some consciences.
The debate on the concept of institutional quality is imminently economic and is related to the development of countries and is a tremendously current issue in the modern world.
A first close-up establishes that institutional quality is directly related to rules that are clear, stable, easily enforced and having an effective Judicial Power, as well as distribution of wealth and low levels of corruption.
The institutions are a reflection of the societies in which they exist. In consequence, a serious discussion about how to improve our institutional quality is a task that we are all responsible for.
There is not a democracy in the world that does not have domestic political quarrels and no one is scared of that or brings up the “filler” of institutional quality. We should be worried when those primaries become distorted and the State is used to settle issues, or violent means are used, like when a group of criminals (who were thought to be protectors of the public faith and truth) took over by force in the mid-seventies, made the country get down on its knees and decided among thousands of Argentines, who would live and who would not.