The Nation "Occurs by the corresponding route"

In legal jargon, this is the classic formula used by the authorities, both in the administrative and judicial spheres, to flatly reject any request made before a body or instance that does not have the competence to understand the matter.

The laconic but imperative formula conveys a clear message to the appellant who blundered his way. "Occur by the appropriate means" must therefore be the short and blunt institutional response that Seprelad must give to the unusual "private complaint" made by the Minister of the Interior, Arnaldo Giuzzio, against former President Horacio Cartes, presented before an institution that notoriously lacks legal competence to receive complaints of alleged punishable acts.

Seprelad does not have the legal powers to receive, much less process, complaints from individuals, even when they may be related to alleged acts related to money laundering. The scope of competence of Seprelad is strictly defined by law and its framework of action as a technical body is strictly limited by the powers that the law grants it, in accordance with the principle of legality that must govern the acts of the public administration.

In this sense, Law 1,015 defines who are the authorized and obligated subjects to make complaints or reports of suspicious operations to Seprelad. Individuals, unless they are habitually engaged in financial intermediation, are not included in the list, so Mr. Arnaldo Giuzzio, clarifying that his complaint was made "in his own right", is not entitled to submit suspicious transaction reports. And if its presentation were classified as the formal complaint of a punishable act, Seprelad would not be the competent body to receive it, but the Public Ministry, so in any of the cases there is no room but the outright rejection of said presentation.

[210214] 🎁 i ate yupdduk too (spicy rice cake restaurant)ㅋ i just forgot to add cheese ㅋㅋ you have to put chees… https://t.co/iZhygX6CgO

— ً Sun Feb 14 06:59:17 +0000 2021

Any action by Seprelad that deviates from the framework of its attributions would make its head incur in a poor performance of functions.

Given this situation, it is worth asking, why did Minister Giuzzio not formulate the report on behalf of the Ministry of the Interior, which as a state agency is considered an obligated subject and, therefore, authorized to formulate reports of suspicious operations to Seprelad? Was it an error due to ignorance of the law or a deliberate blunder?

After witnessing the media deployment of the minister, who spread his complaint with great fanfare, the answer seems very obvious. Giuzzio knew as a lawyer and former prosecutor that if he presented his report on behalf of the Ministry of the Interior, it could be validly received by Seprelad, even if its content was inconsistent, as it is, but in such a case the minister would be obliged not to reveal and keep the confidentiality of the complaint made because this is what Law 1,015 imperatively mandates to all regulated entities in order not to hinder the technical work of financial intelligence that Seprelad carries out based on the reports received.

Choosing the wrong path therefore crudely reveals the true motivation for this “denunciation”. It was not the stealthy handling of information in order to seriously assist Seprelad that the complainant was seeking, but the media hubbub for clearly political purposes, and this was only possible by presenting the inadmissible complaint "in its own right" so as not to compromise institutional responsibility for the portfolio under his charge.

Only that by doing it this way, this "complaint" is irremediably condemned to the file.

Giuzzio has already achieved his goal of exploiting his thunderous but short-lived fireworks. It can only be hoped that Seprelad does not fall into this political game that does little favor to the country's institutions and does not deviate from the framework of the law by processing requests that exceed the framework of its competence.