Córdoba's legislature returned after nearly two months of paralysis, but the issue that dominated the institutional conflict remained unresolved. The governing bloc brought the leave request against Radical lawmaker Alejandra Ferrero to the floor for a third time and, instead of opening debate, sent it back to committee. The majority approved the motion, renewing criticism over the use of the parliamentary agenda to manage a political dispute.
Justicialist legislator Leonardo Limia promoted the request. The case stems from Ferrero's decision to remove Omar Ludueña, a permanent legislative employee accused of sexual abuse, from her office. Limia questioned what he sees as a double standard in Ferrero's explanations and argued that, since a committee had already discussed and reported on the issue, the matter should continue there.
The file combines dimensions that must remain separate. One is the criminal and employment investigation concerning the employee, which requires the presumption of innocence, protection of possible victims and decisions by competent authorities. Another is Ferrero's political responsibility for how she acted, communicated and managed her office. Merging them can confuse standards and weaken due process.
Nine opposition blocs responded with a joint statement: UCR, Frente Cívico, PRO, Construyendo Córdoba, Encuentro Vecinal, La Libertad Avanza, Partido Demócrata, Izquierda Socialista-FIT Unidad and Valores Republicanos. They accused the government of keeping the legislature inactive for almost two months only to adopt the option it had previously rejected.
The governing bloc says committee review allows the collection of evidence, hearings and a less rushed decision. That may be valid if there is a schedule, evidentiary rules and a deadline for a report. Without them, the referral becomes indefinite postponement and leaves the lawmaker, the blocs and the institution trapped in a controversy that prevents a normal agenda.
The case exposes the absence of clear internal rules for leave, sanctions and ethics. The legislature should define what conduct triggers a measure, who investigates, the rights of the affected person, how sensitive information is protected and what majority is required. Without predictable rules, each bloc interprets procedure according to convenience and a personal dispute can block collective work.
Despite the tension, lawmakers approved a Provincial Sports Clubs Week for the third week of October. The bill by Limia and Patricia Bota recognizes the social role of clubs. Passage shows that the chamber can handle other issues, but it also contrasts with the cost of weeks without debate on budgets, security, services and executive oversight.
The next step should be a process with a clear deadline and public reasons. The committee must define the alleged acts, distinguish responsibilities and issue a report for floor debate. Normality will return when the conflict no longer controls whether sessions open or close and is resolved through a transparent procedure compatible with individual rights and the duty to legislate.
