A list attributed to the governor of Santa Cruz Luis Fernando Camacho caused a strong shake-up in the Unidad alliance. The document is said to have been sent from the Chonchocoro prison. In it, names of figures banned by the leadership of Creemos are mentioned.
According to reports, the list was delivered directly to Samuel Doria Medina. The businessman and candidate leads the unity bloc that aims to bring together part of the opposition. The list was reportedly a warning.
Among the banned names are Deputy Luisa Nayar, Rector Vicente Cuéllar, and Assemblywoman Paola Aguirre. Also appearing are Andrea Barrientos, Pamela Flores, Samanta Nogales, and Carlos Campo. All of them, at some point, expressed support for Doria Medina.
Luisa Nayar denounced that Doria Medina confirmed Camacho's veto to her. She said he told her directly and with witnesses present. According to the legislator, Camacho considered her inclusion a "matter of state."
Nayar explained that the alleged reason for the veto was a request for a report she led on Camacho's management. She indicated that this is part of her role as a deputy. She also hinted that there is an attempt to silence critical women.
The deputy described the situation as a display of old political practices. "Divide and conquer," Nayar warned. She accused both leaders of the alliance of allowing a regression in the opposition.
Nayar responsabilizó a Camacho y Doria Medina por una eventual derrota en agosto
Meanwhile, Vicente Cuéllar also accused Camacho of vetoing him. He stated that Samuel Doria Medina told him his name was on the list. Cuéllar called for an emergency meeting to address the issue.
Paola Aguirre, an assemblywoman for Santa Cruz, confirmed that her name appears on the blacklist. She demanded explanations from Creemos, her own party.
Aguirre indicated that Camacho encouraged her to have greater national prominence and that since then, blocks to her work began. She was even denied permission to visit him in prison.
The Santa Cruz legislator pointed directly at Efraín Suárez, a leader of Creemos. She accused him of sabotaging her political presence and covering up the existence of the list. She said her exclusion has political and gender motivations.
Aguirre, meanwhile, accused Creemos of handing her the list with her name. She denied the version of the party's vice president, Efraín Suárez, who dismissed the existence of the document.
"I am certain that this list exists," Aguirre declared at a press conference. She accused her party's leadership of trying to sabotage her work.
Deputy Samanta Nogales was also mentioned in the list. She stated that she has no intention of running. Even so, she was included without explanation in the document.
Speculation or old political practice?
Unidad Nacional negó la existencia de la lista
Andrea Barrientos described the version of the list as irresponsible. She stated that she doesn't believe such a document exists. She also pointed out that there is a lot of speculation.
From Creemos, they denied the existence of a blacklist. They issued a statement rejecting any veto. They assured that they only propose names within their own party.
Creemos emphasized that they do not intervene in the selection of other forces within the alliance. They said that the endorsements were made without their party's mediation. They stated that they welcomed the support of figures like Cuéllar and Nayar.
Unidad Nacional, another member of the alliance, also spoke out. Elizabeth Reyes declared that there are no formal vetoes. However, she admitted that the selection of lists generates tensions.
Reyes explained that not all candidates can ultimately be selected. She stated that there are always complaints when lists are drawn up. She considered it a recurring problem in national politics.
The banned names are part of sectors seeking to renew politics. Some, like Nayar and Aguirre, have already announced they will not participate. Others demand explanations before making a decision.
The dispute sparked by the list reflects the conflict of interests caused by political quotas. The false unity bloc continues to disintegrate, along with the hopes of the population.
The episode, far from being an anecdote, calls into question the promise of a united alternative against masismo. The alliance proved incapable of avoiding resorting to old political practices. According to the complainants, this further weakens the credibility of the opposition bloc.
