By majority, it ratified the ruling of the Court that judged the case that produced a political storm 17 years ago. Claudio Uberti, sentenced to 4 years and 6 months, is the only one with an effective prison sentence.
One year and two months after the Oral Criminal Economic Court No. 1 handed down the sentences in the case of the suitcase with almost US$800 thousand of Guido Antonini Wilson, the Federal Chamber of Criminal Cassation ratified the sentences and the acquittal of former Minister of Planning Julio De Vido. Room II, made up of Angela Ledesma, Guillermo Yacobucci and Alejandro Slokar decided by majority to reject all appeals from the defenses, but also from the Public Prosecutor’s Office and left everything as it arrived: The former head of OCCOVI, Claudio Uberti – the main person involved – saw his sentence ratified to 4 years and six months in prison for attempted money smuggling, the fate of which remains unknown. Antonini Wilson could never be tried in our country.
In just over 50 pages, the first to cast his vote was Yacobucci, regarding the oral trial that took place last year, 16 years after the events occurred, with a handful of customs officers, Uberti and De Vido on the bench. And under the prism of aggravated smuggling, that is why an economic criminal court processed it, far from the initial scandal that arose from the case that caused a political schism during the first Kirchnerism.
“Insufficient”
“Without prejudice then to the obvious impact of De Vido on everything related to this way of interacting with Venezuelan representatives, agents and officials, the analysis of his responsibility in the case, claimed by the Cassation Prosecutor, must be subject to a proven impact. of his hierarchical position as far as the smuggling in question is concerned,” Yacobucci noted his rejection of what prosecutor Mario Villar intended to accuse. There was no link between his functional role as Uberti’s boss and the entry of the suitcase itself.. “Insufficient,” said the judge.
“I understand that neither the leading role of Julio De Vido in relation to bilateral relations with Venezuela, nor the close relationship that united him with the Kirchner couple or Claudio Uberti, nor the immediate notification of the occurrence of the events via telephone are, in themselves, alone, suitable indicators that show behavior that shows its adequacy to the illicit acts analyzed,” he concluded to support the acquittal. “There is even no indication that he attempted, directly or indirectly, any contact after the occurrence of the event that would enable the existence of a joint act to be predicated.. There are no indications from the witnesses or the remaining defendants that De Vido gave authorization for the named Antonini Wilson to board the flight, or had knowledge of that or the details of the transfer of the money that was kidnapped,” he added.
During the section in which they reviewed De Vido’s acquittal, ratifying it, Yacobucci entered into Uberti’s accusation, doing the opposite, with the telephone exchanges that occurred immediately after the fact, in 2007, and the courtesy shown to Antonini and the entertainment dinner at the Rosa Negra for the Venezuelan delegation, in addition to contacts via email with María Victoria Bereziuk, Uberti’s secretary.
The customs officers were not exonerated either: More credence was given to the statements of witnesses regarding the fact that it was the PSA that originated the operation and the entire sequence after the discovery that included Ricardo Echegaray (then head of Customs) who ended up acquitted in the trial, without accusation from the prosecutor and, of course, his situation was not even discussed in Cassation. The customs officers were considered “facilitators” of the smuggling attempt and that situation did not change in this ruling because – it was considered – they should have immediately alerted the judicial authorities due to the implications of the case. Ledesma differed in her vote: in a brief paragraph she referred to a precedent in which she had voted that she considered that currencies cannot be considered “merchandise.” under the terms of the Customs Code and therefore does not fall into the category of smuggling. Slokar supported Yacobucci’s vote.
What the defenses had raised
Uberti had argued that his conviction was based on an erroneous application of a criminal offense given that, in any case, there was nothing other than a “baggage violation” as a maneuver is known in which elements are discovered by Customs without being properly declared. When a ruse is attempted to hide that merchandise, it becomes contraband. He also alleged that Antonini recognized that the suitcase and its contents belonged to him and that no previous meetings between the two could be proven. He asked for the benefit of the doubt.
The customs officials, for their part, Jorge Lamastra, Guillermo Lucángeli, María Cristina Gallini and Rosa Nélida García (from the guard to the different authorities in Aeroparque responsible for Customs) alleged that they acted as indicated by their functions, when considering the case, from a It began as a violation of the baggage regime, on that flight chartered by Enarsa that returned at dawn from Venezuela, with passengers added at the last minute.
Almost 17 years after the events, and with Antonini Wilson from somewhere in the world, a judicial chapter closes with the double confirmation dictated by Cassation of a fact that caused a national and international political impact.
Source: Ambito
I am Pierce Boyd, a driven and ambitious professional working in the news industry. I have been writing for 24 Hours Worlds for over five years, specializing in sports section coverage. During my tenure at the publication, I have built an impressive portfolio of articles that has earned me a reputation as an experienced journalist and content creator.
