Luis Almagro violated ethical obligations

The investigation of which he is the general secretary Organization of American States (OAS), Luis Almagrobecause he maintained an intimate relationship with the female employee, found that he violated the internal provisions on “common sense and good judgment”, although not intentionally.

“An external investigation concluded that the Secretary General had violated OAS Rules and Regulations in connection with the provisions on common sense and good judgment and additional ethical obligations for the Secretary General,” said the text, which EFE had access to this Monday.

The report stated that he “did not violate OAS Rules and Regulations in relation to supervisory duties, salary increases, intimidation, travel or conflicts of interest”.

By maintaining an intimate relationship by allowing Official of the OAS continued to work as an integral part of his team of advisers, “violated his additional ethical obligations and contrary to the very spirit of ‘common sense and good judgment’ always required of all staff members and other service providers of the General Secretariat,” noted that the text.

Almagro, who was chancellor Uruguay between 2010 and 2015is located in front OAS since 2015. An investigation was conducted against him to determine whether he violated OAS regulations in the context of his romantic relationship with a subordinate.

These external investigations established that in related charges to the intimate relationship itself, his conduct “does not reflect the level of intent necessary to support the appearance of an intentional violation.”

Almagro, according to government lawyers Miller & Chevalierin charge of this evaluation, internally analyzed and consulted with his advisors the scope of obligations regarding the conflict of interest according to the Code of Ethics and maintained a sufficient administrative and hierarchical distance with the employee to avoid the configuration of superior-supervisee relationship.

Likewise, he “refused to participate in administrative proceedings that encroached on the interests” of that worker, “he did not allow the intimate relationship to interfere with the performance of work, and he did not hide or conceal it, allowing the intimate relationship to be maintained public knowledge since its inception.

“As we have received no formal or informal complaints, complaints or comments internally or externally OAS Alluding to possible inconveniences in an intimate relationship, the Secretary General remained convinced that his behavior did not violate his ethical obligations towards OAS“, the document adds.

Miller & Chevalier estimated that the violation of the code of ethics stems from the fact that “he did not refrain from close and intimate cooperation with the official” after starting an intimate relationship or, otherwise, continued the relationship with close and intimate cooperation with that official.

The company’s lawyers “could not confirm this”. almagro “I would seek oral or written advice from the directors of the three areas listed in the Code of Ethics.”

The controversy surrounding this relationship erupted shortly after the Board of Directors of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) decided by majority vote to remove its president last September. Mauricio Claver-Caronebecause of a love affair with a subordinate, which she denied.

Miller & Chevalier noted that their findings “suggest” a review of rules and regulations OAS “in order to avoid this kind of situation in the future.”

“The OAS would benefit from more comprehensive anti-intimate conduct regulation to broaden its scope and to have risk management, reporting and applicable mitigation procedures in place,” the 121-page analysis concludes.

In the additional investigation document in which almagro In his response to the finding, the Secretary General maintained that at no point in his relationship with the official did he commit “mistakes or deficiencies” in the performance of his duties.

“Everything is objective proof that my action and intention was public and private behavior, bearing in mind the respectability of the role of the general secretary and the prestige OASas well as each of the member states that are part of it,” he wrote in his reply.

The Uruguayan assured that it was common sense “difficult to define” and asserted that it adheres to “the most objective basis that can exist in this regard” by seeking third-party opinions and documenting itself legally and ethically.