Corruption Arrest in Argentina

Case Facts
The former vice president of Argentina and other five high-profile government officials have been detained awaiting their trial following corruption allegations. It is also believed that several allies from private sectors in Argentina have been locked up due to misappropriating public funds. The incarceration of the V.P and the co-accused, occurred as president Mauricio Macri has pledged to overturn the culture of impunity in Argentina (Londono & Politi 1). However, according to reports from various sources, it is indicated that President Macri’s actions have majorly netted political opponents. Mr. Macri is, therefore, facing charges of manipulating the judiciary system to weaken the opposition side. Although the step of rooting out corrupt leaders in Argentina has taken a higher note, Mr. Gavarano an official of the Argentine government, passed that their efforts may ultimately fail due to the “judges.” According to Mr. Gavarano, several judges and magistrates sitting in the federal court in Buenos Aires have turned a deaf year on corruption cases to go unpunished or without taking the required action (Londono & Politi 1). Nevertheless, it is believed that even after conviction, prominent politicians always find an excuse for staying out of custody and this gives them a chance to protect and maintain their assets.

Key issues
Although president Macri and his government are trying their best to wipe out corruption in Argentina, it is thought that he aims his actions mostly to the opposite side to serve his interest.

Reports indicate that President Mauricio is using the judicial system to bring down his opponents (Londono & Politi 1). On the other hand, the legal system is accused of not using proper precautions to eliminate corruption instead; it has turned a blind eye on matters that regard corruption in Argentina. It is evident that Argentines cannot trust Argentines justice having that most of the judges in the judicial department are influenced by politics.
Alternative Course of Action
Ethical questions such as, “is President Macri using the judicial system to serve his interest best, can Argentines believe and trust the Argentines Judicial department?” have been raised by several concerned citizens. It is true to say that President Macri is doing an excellent job by taking down corrupt leaders. However, the president should also focus on leaders from his side, as he’s doing to the opposition side. It is obligated for Mr. Macri also to take the action of investigating corrupt judges and order for their detention. Argentines judicial system is acting unethically having that some of its judges are influenced by politics and have failed to address the issues of corruption in Argentina (Londono & Politi 1). Judges are obligated to protect the public’s funds, the rights of the people and punish anyone going against the constitution.
Evaluation of the Alternatives
President Macri being accused of using the judicial system to serve his interest is a matter that has got many in a dilemma. “Yes, he is eliminating corruption,” “why majorly focus on the oppositions?” President Mauricio Macri will act ethically if is he investigates every official in his command (Cabinet). If the president has declared to wipe out corruption, he should start by the step of inspecting those who work closely with him and even detain those that are guilty to fraud in his cabinet. The Judicial system should not be influenced by political leaders instead; it should focus on rooting out corrupt political leaders. President Macri is obligated to further his investigations to the judge’s panel since politics has influenced some of the judges.
Recommendation
The president and the judicial system should work hand in hand to protect the constitution and root out corrupt politicians. The president should use the legal system to end corruption in Argentina but; it is recommended to him to focus on every person (his side, opposition, judges and private sectors).
Congressman Combating Harassment Settled His misconduct Case (Katie Rogers & Kenneth P. Vogel Jan 20, 2018)
Case Facts
Patrick Meehan, a Pennsylvania Republican, who played the topmost role in the fight against sexual harassment in Congress, is facing the accusation. Meehan is being accused of using taxpayers’ money worth thousands of dollars to settle his misconduct complaint. He was taken to court by a former aide last year of making romantic advances to her without her consent. Although Mr. Meehan denies the allegations posted against him, he still agreed to a settlement and a confidentiality provision. After the complaints have gone public, a spokesman for the House Speaker passed that Mr. Meehan would be excluded from the House Ethics Committee, where he was offering assistance in investigating sexual harassment cases (Rogers & Vogel 2). However, it is a different case for the aide who filled the allegations. It is thought that representative from the office of Mr. Meehan and congressional lawyers suggested that the accuser wrongly interpreted Mr. Meehan’s behavior. The aide was demoralized by this thought, which led to her rift from friends, colleagues, and isolation from her family and boyfriend. It is indicated that Mr. Meehan and the House, blamed the woman (aide) for going against the nondisclosure agreement. They, therefore, file a suit against her which could lead to the withdrawal of the settlement and destroy her career prospects completely. The aide (the accuser) has been left with no job and various bills to pay (lawyers and other procedures).
Key issues
It is evident that Congressman Meehan took a wrong step of using public funds to settle his misconduct. It is unethical and unfair when Mr. Meehan is represented by congressional lawyers who are supposed to fight sexual harassment in the Congress. The accuser is, therefore, being accused of violating the nondisclosure agreement, an act of inequality and unfairness having that the Congress is obligated to investigate Mr. Meehan and call forward all the witnesses that are concerned in this case (Rogers & Vogel 2). It is evident that women who file charges against members of Congress regarding sexual harassment, end up losing the case and left with nothing, they even end up losing their jobs.
Alternative Course of Action
The justice department should not have allowed House representative and congressional lawyers represent Mr. Meehan in the case. Preferably, the Congress through its lawyers, it should investigate Mr. Meehan properly and bring forward every evidence it finds. The Congress should order Mr. Meehan to pay back the taxpayers money he used in settling his misconduct and think of a way to compensate the aide, having that the committee is obligated to those guilty of sexual harassment. The jury handling Congressman Meehan’s case should also include witnesses from the aide’s side to testify.
Evaluation of the Alternatives
The government (Congress) should not allow lawyers from the congressional and the House office of employment council to represent Patrick Meehan. Allowing him the opportunity of using government assets, is one way of showing that the government is more concerned about its public figures than its citizens. The Congress should work against law offenders hence; they should not take part in supporting those that are guilty of crimes such as sexual harassment. Since the Congress has dedicated itself to solving sexual harassment issues, it is up to them to protect the accuser through conducting a proper investigation on Patrick Meehan; rather than trying to solve the case secretively by introducing the nondisclosure agreement. The Congress should let Meehan be accountable for his mistakes and deny him the opportunity of using public assets to cover his name.
Recommendation
The proper investigation should be carried on Patrick Meehan and if he is found guilty of the allegation, he should face charges and be accountable for his doings. The Congress should not offer him government funds and lawyers to assist him in covering his name. Mr. Meehan should also be charged with misusing public money to serve his interest. The Congress should consider compensating women who have been sexually harassed by their political bosses and as a result end up losing their jobs even after spending a fortune in following the procedures of filling the allegations.
The Republicans guide and “Presidential Etiquette” (The Editorial Board Jan. 20, 2018)
Case Facts
The Republicans guide to presidential etiquette; the first edition was published last May as an updated guide to what the Republicans are considering being morally right and acceptable from the commander in Chief. The current white house occupant has been accused of various unethical actions such as charging others falsely without having evidence, using insulting language, undermining the law and issuing threats to the media personnel.
Key issues
The ways of the current Chief Commander of the USA, have never pleased the Democrats. President Trump decision that restricted the Jewish Democrats from the Congress to Hanukkah in the white house party; accusing a television anchor of participating in a murder without having evidence. The president is referring to the American justice system as a “joke” a “laughingstock,” mocking the military flag ceremony and issued threats to deregister a the Televised program that aired news that did not favor him. The decision has, however, have been opposed by a majority of Democrats. However, the Republicans, who are considered as supporters of Donald Trump, are still seen admiring him and finding him fit to be the Chief of Command of the USA (The Editorial Board 1).
Alternative Course of Action
The president should first notice that the USA is made up of both the Republicans and Democrats. Acting as the head of State he should favor both sides (democrats and republicans) and consider their opinions and demands. It is up to the president to remind the Citizens, whether republican or democrat “it’s one America.” The president should not point fingers before having clear evidence instead; he should urge the CIA and FBI to conduct an extreme investigation and bring the culprit responsible to justice. The freedom of speech is a right to everyone, the president threatening to close down a media station because it exposed his wrong deeds, is an unethical procedure. Rather, he should avoid scandals and actions that will destroy his reputation. It is evident that Mr. Trump has chosen to undermine the Law of the United States having that he regards the judicial system a “laughingstock.” The president should show respect to every arm of the government; he should be the one punishing those who undermine the law not the other way round.
Evaluation of the Alternatives
It is not the duty of the president to point out those guilty or not guilty of an offense. Mr. Donald Trump should let experts from the FBI and the CIA conduct their investigations and bring out the real criminals. If Mr. Trump agreed to invite the Jewish Democrats at the State House party, it would have been an act of equality to everyone indicating that whether democrat or republican America is one.
Recommendation
The Chief Commander should respect all the arms of the government and all the rights of the citizens. The president should avoid companies that will destroy his reputation and focus on punishing those that are undermining the law. President Trump should stop making false accusations which have no evidence.
Senator Mendez’s Retrial adds Twist to Midterm Elections (Nick Corasaniti Jan 19 2018)
Case Facts
The Justice Department has announced its intentions to retry the charges filed against Senator Mendez of New Jersey. The jury’s decision comes two months later after it had deadlocked corruption charges that were filed against the senator. Retrying of the case is an indication that Mr. Mendez will have another chance to defend himself in a year before his re-election. Senator Mendez, a Democrat, has served the Senate for 12 years. It is perceived that another politically lethal trial can place Democrats in an unplanned position, by the fact that they will be forced to spend more resources in New Jersey to gain the trust of the citizens. New Jersey is identified as a strong and reliable Democratic state especially during this electioneering time in which Democrats are hoping to shift the Senate back to the Democratic control. However, there has emerged no strong Republican to challenge Mr. Mendez in the upcoming election race (Carasaniti 1). The Republicans are however hoping that the corruption issues will affect the Democrats in the congressional races in New Jersey.
Key issues
Senator Mendez was charged with twelve counts of corruption, six counts of bribery and three counts of honest services fraud. Mr. Mendez has also been accused of doing favors for his wealthy doctor friend in exchange for political donations. The Senator’s case is jeopardizing the Democrats chances of winning the midterm elections, having that much will be spent to gain favors from the citizens of New Jersey.
Alternative Course of Action
Senator Mendez should face charges for all allegations presented against him. The Senator should consider stepping down since he has served the Senate for more than twelve years. Since the Mr. Mendez is a popular figure, and there has emerged no strong opponent from the Republicans, Mr. Mendez should pick and support another Democrat who will take over his seat as he retires from politics
Evaluation of the Alternatives
According to the Justice Department, the senator is expected to answer to all allegations presented against him. Going through the trial will at least give the Senator a chance to come out clean if he is not guilty of the accusations. However, it is evident that Mr. Mendez is growing old and it’s high time for him to retire from politics. The Senator should withdraw from politics and allow a much younger Democrat to take over his position in the Senate.
Recommendation
Since the Senator is facing corruption charges, he should not take part in the coming midterm elections. Preferably, all the resources that are to be used to keep him in the political arena should be used to support a new Democratic leader. The Senator should take make an ethic move of retiring and facing his charges boldly.
A Turkish Scandal beneath a fleeting spotlight (Benjamin Weiser Jan 22 2018)
Case facts
It has taken only a short period for Mr. Kim to hit the limelight. In one of Joon H. Kim’s final cases, while acting as the attorney of the United States in Manhattan, it is thought that Mr. Kim’s office secured a conviction against a banker from Turkish. It was a case that showed the people “beyond our boundaries who are doubtful of our motivations, of our system, to see it work” Mr. Kim passed. Mr. Kim’s authority obtained cooperation agreement and a guilty plea from Reza Zarrab. Reza Zarrab is a conspirator and a renowned wealthy gold trader. He later became a key witness to the government where he testified that when Recep Tayyip Erdogan was acting as the prime minister of Turkey, he was aware and approved the sanctions-busting activity (Weiser 1).
Erdogan, now acting as the president of Turkey, has passed harsh attacks to Mr. Kim and his prosecutors, claiming that the evidence presented had been fabricated by “Gulenists,” a movement that was banned in Turkey as an organization of terrorists. It is thought that Turkey commenced an investigation into Mr. Bharara and Mr. Kim who were responsible for announcing the charges in 2016. However, Mr. Kim was proud that the case had reached the public and added that Mr. Zarrab pleaded guilty of the offense and his plea was critical because it validated the suit and identified a key conspirator
Key issue
Mr. Kim’s short period as the attorney of the US in Manhattan managed to gain a guilty plea from Zerrab accusing the President of Turkey of approving and having knowledge of the sanctions-busting activity (Weiser 1). Mr. Kim and Bharara did not hesitate to bring to the public such a case. Through bringing the case forward to the citizens and the media, the government of Turkey opened an investigation process for both Mr. Bharara and Mr. Kim.
Alternative Course of Action
Mr. Kim and Bharara took an ethical step by allowing the public to gain knowledge about the Turkish scandal that was beneath a fleeting spotlight. However, Mr. Kim and Bharara should let the case be handled by the Turkish law or The Hague. They should protect the witness and compensate Zarrab by reducing the sentence that he will receive since he pleaded guilty and pointed out those who were responsible for the sanctions-busting activity. However, the two should have faced Erdogan before presenting the case to the public.
Evaluation of the Alternatives
Mr. Kim and Bharara took an ethical step by allowing the public to gain knowledge about the Turkish scandal that was beneath a fleeting spotlight. Such scandals should be made public for the people to know and have a say in them. However, Mr. Kim should have consulted the government of Turkey first, before taking the matter straight to the media and public.
Recommendation
Mr. Kim and Bharara’s actions would have been more ethical if they involved the government of Turkey having that it is a case that is concerning the president of Turkey. They should also consider Mr. Zarrab since he decided to come clean through pleading guilty having that there was no room for him to escape the claws of the law.
Works Cited
Corasaniti, Nick. Senator Mendez’s Retrial adds Twist to Midterm Elections, The New York
Times, Jan 19, 2018.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/…/19/…/federal-prosecutors-announce-plans-to-retry-senLondono, Ernesto & Politi, Daniel Corruption Arrest in Argentina. The New York Times, Jan 8,
2018.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/08/world/americas/argentina-corruption.htmlRogers, Katie & Vogel, Knnetrh P. Congressman Combating Harassment Settled His
misconduct Case; The New York Times, Jan 20, 2018.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/20/us/politics/patrick-meehan-sexual-harassment.htmlThe Editorial Board. The Republicans guide and “Presidential Etiquette” The New York Times,
Jan. 20, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/topic/subject/ethicsWeiser, Benjamin. A Turkish Scandal beneath a fleeting spotlight. The New York Times, Jan 22
2018.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/nyregion/joon-kim-bharara-prosecutor.html