The debate organized by “No Pasa Nada” took place at the Teatro Espressivo, featuring seven presidential candidates: Álvaro Ramos (PLN), Claudia Dobles (CAC), Ariel Robles (FA), Juan Carlos Hidalgo (PUSC), Natalia Díaz (PUP), José Aguilar Berrocal (Avanza), and Eliécer Feinzaig (PLP).
The event began with a significant delay due to traffic issues. The audience waited for 45 minutes before the moderators, Karol Quesada and Pietro Cercone, addressed the crowd and explained the rules.
Early in the debate, a discussion on national security led to a notable exchange between Álvaro Ramos and José Aguilar Berrocal regarding individual guarantees and the potential use of a state of exception. Ramos opposed suspending individual rights, while Aguilar clarified that such measures are already outlined in the Constitution. Eliécer Feinzaig also criticized any move toward applying states of exception selectively, arguing it would create divisions within society.
When employment policies were discussed, tensions rose over proposals for 4×3 work schedules. Ariel Robles challenged Claudia Dobles on her stance regarding 12-hour shifts for young workers. Dobles responded by distancing herself from the current legislative project but indicated support for flexible work arrangements given changing labor dynamics.
Education funding was another point of contention. Claudia Dobles questioned José Aguilar Berrocal about meeting the constitutional mandate to allocate 8% of GDP to education. Aguilar expressed opposition to this percentage, suggesting that existing funds should be used more efficiently rather than increasing allocations.
During discussions on energy policy, right-leaning candidates found common ground in supporting market liberalization proposals presented by Juan Carlos Hidalgo.
An off-air moment became public when Eliécer Feinzaig’s microphone remained on during a commercial break as he announced his intention to take a bathroom break.
In closing remarks about political polarization and leadership style, Natalia Díaz voiced criticism of President Rodrigo Chaves’ approach. Ariel Robles recounted being personally insulted by Chaves and confronted Díaz about her reactions at that time. The conversation highlighted ongoing concerns over respect and civility in political discourse among candidates.
The debate concluded with participants acknowledging deep differences but also condemning polarization as an obstacle to democratic progress.
