4/ The real question is whether it's better to impeach the PM now and reduce long-term political uncertainty, or trust and take a chance on the PM who allegedly took part in the insurrection and prolong the unrest for years to come.

3/ Anyone following the politics around the insurrection understands that today's impeachment was, at least partially, justified because the PM refused to fill the bench in the Constitutional Court. This refusal could delegitimize the legality of the Court's ruling once the process is complete.

2/ In addition to the misleading headline, the article quotes an expert saying the second impeachment signals that "the political unrest could be worsened."

Findings: Countries with PR systems tend to discipline their own MNCs for their alleged breaches of global norms in host countries, responding to peer review and advocacy. Includes quantitative tests of the OECD Guidelines complaints + Cases of S.Korea, Holland, and the UK.

Tl;dr: Electoral institutions moderate enforcement strategies' effectiveness. Norms become salient with issue parties supporting them, pushing mainstream left parties to respond to the issue parties' adoption of the previously non-salient issue of MNC behavior abroad.

People think advocacy or IO-led peer review increase the salience of those norms. But if you grew up in a country with national champion companies, you’d instinctively understand how difficult it is to convince people to care about MNC behavior in host countries.