|  ElCiudadano.cl |  Noticias

El Ciudadano

Original article: Asesor parlamentario y defensa privada de Senador Ossandón: niega uso de recursos públicos

The involvement of attorney Ronald Von Der Weth in a civil case concerning Senate President Manuel José Ossandón has sparked a debate about the boundaries between the roles of public-funded parliamentary advisors and the private professional activities they may engage in concurrently.

The issue arose after judicial records revealed that Von Der Weth represented Ossandón in a civil dispute initiated by attorney Ricardo Freire Scheel, who sued the senator for payment of professional fees stemming from a prior legal defense.

The controversy does not stem from the existence of the lawsuit, but rather from determining whether a parliamentary advisor’s involvement in the private defense of a senator could raise concerns regarding administrative integrity or the use of public resources.

The Attorney’s Perspective

When consulted by this outlet, Ronald Von Der Weth dismissed any notion of conflict between his dual roles.

«My involvement was exclusively in my capacity as a private attorney and not in the exercise of functions related to my job as an external parliamentary advisor,» he stated.

He further clarified that he has never entered into any advising contract with Senator Ossandón.

«I do not have and have never had a contractual advising relationship with Senator Manuel José Ossandón. During the relevant period, I provided external advisory services to the faction on specific matters of security and defense,» he affirmed.

He explained that these tasks did not include judicial representation and did not impede the independent practice of his profession.

The attorney added that his involvement in the case was «exceptional, specific, and limited,» confined to certain actions before higher courts, after which he resigned from the representation and power of attorney.

Regarding the funding of the defense, he was emphatic in stating that it was conducted «within the framework of a strictly private professional relationship, without the use of public resources, parliamentary allocations, or any institutional funds of any kind.»

Background of the Debate

Public records from the judiciary indicate that Von Der Weth appeared on behalf of Ossandón in various procedural actions related to the civil lawsuit initiated by Freire Scheel.

Additionally, documents available through the Senate’s transparency mechanisms show that the attorney provided advisory services for the Renovación Nacional faction during part of the period in which these actions took place.

The coexistence of these circumstances has led to inquiries regarding a potential conflict of interest.

However, to date, there has been no administrative, judicial, or oversight body resolution that has established the existence of irregularities.

Is There a Conflict of Interest?

Experts consulted by this outlet suggest that the answer hinges on a central issue: determining whether the judicial representation was funded or carried out using public resources associated with parliamentary duties.

One interpretation suggests that parliamentary advisors can freely exercise their professions outside the duties for which they were hired, provided there is effective separation between both activities and no public funds are used.

From this perspective, Von Der Weth’s involvement in a private case would not necessarily constitute a violation if it was performed outside the job functions contracted by the faction and funded through independent professional agreements.

Another interpretation argues that, given the nature of the public resources involved in parliamentary advisories, it is legitimate to examine whether there was any overlap between public duties and private activities, especially when the beneficiary of the judicial representation is a parliamentarian belonging to the same political party.

Transparency and Standards of Integrity

The case reignites an ongoing discussion in Congress concerning the transparency standards applicable to advisors, external professionals, and personnel funded through parliamentary allocations.

Public law experts indicate that the key in such situations is not the existence of private professional relationships themselves, but rather the ability to demonstrate a clear separation between public resources and private activities.

While some argue that the known details thus far do not allow for concluding the existence of irregularities, others believe that this case could serve to enhance control and traceability mechanisms regarding the functions actually performed by external advisors hired by parliamentary factions.

For now, the controversy remains a topic of public and political debate. Ronald Von Der Weth’s statements deny any use of public resources and assert that his participation in the defense of Manuel José Ossandón corresponded solely to the private practice of law, an explanation likely to remain under scrutiny by political observers and integrity specialists.

Beyond the response provided by the attorney to this outlet, the fact remains that he has not substantiated that his defense was conducted as a private attorney and funded through private resources, noting that he has received fees via parliamentary allocations from the RN faction, of which Ossandón is a member. Furthermore, this outlet has verified that the attorney did not engage in a limited and specific advising role but rather undertook the case in the Court of Appeals of San Miguel, as evidenced by the appeal documents, filings, and arguments available on the judiciary’s website.

The Citizen

La entrada Parliamentary Advisor and Private Defense Attorney for Senator Ossandón Denies Misuse of Public Funds se publicó primero en El Ciudadano.