Response to Augusto Varas's column: The welfare system of the Armed Forces.

The Armed Forces of Chile do not operate independently. They are subordinate and obedient to the democratically elected political leadership. They comply with the Constitution, the laws, and the current regulations. They are subject to complete and ongoing control and supervision by the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Finance and its Budget Directorate, and, of course, the Comptroller General of the Republic. Additionally, they are subject to the Transparency Law, and any administrative act is subject to public scrutiny, parliamentary oversight, and the corresponding administrative and legal actions when there are crimes, offenses, omissions, or errors.

On July 4, Mr. Augusto Varas published an opinion column (see in El Mostrador) regarding the Welfare System of the Armed Forces (FF.AA.) that contains biases, inaccuracies, and half-truths that lead to conclusions that cast doubt on the FF.AA., but do not constitute a denunciation, as it does not provide any specific facts, no concrete data, only “comments” and personal opinions that are already known from the past.

Mr. Varas opens his argument in the first paragraph, stating the following: “This chain of provisions and norms that range from the constitutional to the regulatory and administrative levels consolidates the anomalous autonomous corporatization of the FF.AA. within the State, which has lasted almost half a century…”

The use of the concept of “almost half a century” clearly aims to place in the reader’s mind that the “chain of provisions and norms that range from the constitutional to the regulatory and administrative levels” would be less than 50 years old, thus suggesting its origin in the military government period, as Mr. Varas also asserts in his conclusions. This is the underlying argument to support the claim that the Armed Forces enjoy autonomy, are above the law, and operate independently, which would give rise to all kinds of assumptions regarding irregularities, misappropriations, and crimes. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It is necessary to clarify that the law that creates the Fiscal Affectation Heritage (P.A.F) is No. 16,771, enacted in 1968, 54 years ago, during the presidency of Frei Montalva. This law empowered the President of the Republic to issue special regulations governing the income, administration, investment, control, and allocation of funds received for any reason by the Departments and Subdepartments of Social Welfare of the Armed Forces and to establish the regime to which the assets and services provided by such funds would be subject.

Indeed, the same author mentions DFL 1 of 1971 as one of the sources of possible irregularities. In fact, President Salvador Allende, under the powers granted by the aforementioned Law No. 16,771, issued D.F.L. No. 1 of 1971, which establishes special regulations for the Welfare Departments of the FF.AA., for the fulfillment of their specific purposes, regulating the acquisition and administration of such assets, their decommissioning, disposal, and allocation of resources. In the transitional article of this legal body, President Allende, more than half a century ago, authorized the commanders-in-chief to assign to the P.A.F. other fiscal properties designated for the Armed Forces.

What Mr. Varas does not mention in his article is that this power, presented as a denunciation against the FF.AA., was granted by President Allende in 1971 and is now extinguished, according to ruling No. 23,752 of 1998 from the Comptroller General of the Republic. It has been 24 years since this administrative act.

The author expressly omits to state that all activities of the Welfare Departments of the Armed Forces are under complete and ongoing scrutiny by the Comptroller General of the Republic. The activities of the Social Welfare Services of the FF.AA. do not constitute business activity, despite engaging in activities classified as commercial by the Commercial Code. This is because their aim is not profit, but rather to provide welfare services to their members. Only when authorized by law can the State engage in business activities, and this is not the case, nor is it when the Ministry of National Assets disposes of properties to third parties, or when other public sector welfare services provide services, even to non-member third parties. Furthermore, in the eventual disposal of properties, the administrative regulations that provide a procedural and substantive framework must be observed in all acts and contracts regarding the mentioned properties, such as Law No. 18,575, the Constitutional Organic Law of General Bases of State Administration, and Law No. 18,880, which establishes the Bases of Administrative Procedures Governing the Acts of State Administration Bodies. All these activities are subject to the rules regarding the process of taking reason.

The above ensures the proper safeguarding of fiscal interests, the promotion of the common good, coordinated action with other public bodies, and legal oversight in the administration’s actions. Therefore, it is not true that the Welfare Services have transformed into real estate companies simply because they can sell properties.

The issue raised is a specific one, of a technical and legal nature. Its domain is quite limited, but it is public, open, and transparent. Those of us who dedicate ourselves to the study and analysis of security and defense issues have the obligation to be rigorous in the information we present to the public, precisely because our area of expertise still lacks an adequate critical mass for these issues to be treated with academic rigor, with updated professional knowledge, and not merely with biases and ideological views that seek only to sow doubt and uncertainty regarding the integrity of the National Defense institutions.

The Armed Forces of Chile do not operate independently. They are subordinate and obedient to the democratically elected political leadership. They comply with the Constitution, the laws, and the current regulations. They are subject to complete and ongoing control and supervision by the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Finance and its Budget Directorate, and, of course, the Comptroller General of the Republic. Additionally, they are subject to the Transparency Law, and any administrative act is subject to public scrutiny, parliamentary oversight, and the corresponding administrative and legal actions when there are crimes, offenses, omissions, or errors.

If anyone has evidence of any wrongdoing, crime, misappropriation, or offense, they have the duty to provide that evidence to the Public Prosecutor’s Office for investigation. What is rather ungraceful and unseemly is to cast shadows of doubt over “possible situations,” providing half-truths and, worse still, omitting mention of administrative acts that have already corrected, modified, or remedied the situations presented as denunciations. It is also concerning that Mr. Varas’s column has not triggered a response from the political authorities responsible for National Defense and those who must ensure the integrity and transparency of State actions, as by not doing so they may be accepting what the columnist indicates, especially knowing that what was mentioned in the July 4 column is incorrect and, if it were correct, those authorities would be responsible for what occurs.

Finally, it is urgent that we broaden the debate regarding security and defense. It is essential that new and enthusiastic individuals are trained and specialized in these matters to generate a critical mass that is rigorous, updated, and prepared, contributing to enriching a debate that is fundamental for national security, from all currents of thought in our society.

Richard Kouyoumdjian
Vice President AthenaLab

Source: El Mostrador