The Fourth Chamber of the Federal Criminal Cassation Chamber, composed of judges Mariano Hernán Borinsky – the president – Gustavo Hornos and Diego Baroitafina – rejected on Tuesday a complaint from the defense of former official K. Sandro Virgola and It confirmed the rejection of the appeal filed against Judge Andres Basso, who, along with Judges Jorge Jorini and Rodrigo Jimenez Uriburu, ruled on the Second Way case. These same judges conducted the trial in the first part of the case in which Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, Lázaro Báez, José López and others were convicted.
In this second section, various national and provincial road officials are accused and credited with validating alleged irregularities in twenty-seven public works allocation files in Santa Cruz County.
In this second section, known as Route II, they must appear before the Federal Oral Tribunal 2 (TOF 2), Martin Baez (the eldest son of the businessman), Julio Mendoza (former president of the construction company), Fernando Botti (former accountant) and Sandro Fergola, The former highway official who had to control Baez is now also under investigation due to the massive increase in his assets during his public administration
On the other hand, veto It rejected Lázaro Báez’s claim that he was not competent to carry out the confiscation ordered in the “First Roads” case.
The ruling confirmed the progress of the implementation process carried out by the Federal Oral Criminal Court No. 10/2018. 2.
The same Fourth Circuit declared inadmissible the extraordinary appeal against the decision that dismissed the appeal against the Federal Criminal Court’s oral decision No. 2 rejecting the claim of incompetence presented by Lázaro’s defense Antonio Baez.
The defense of the person convicted in the Santa Cruz public road works corruption case asked the oral court to deny jurisdiction to execute assets in the updated amount of P684 billion to take advantage of the fraudulent maneuver.
Initially, Lázaro Páez’s defense argued that it was the Oral Federal Criminal Court No. 4 (which intervened in the Ruta del Dinero K case) that should hear the expropriation, since said court had consolidated the businessman’s sentences in the Vialidad and Ruta del Dinero K cases (setting a prison sentence of 15 years).
At the time of dismissing the appeal, Judge Hornus explained that the confiscation was of a purely criminal nature.Therefore, the aforementioned matter may not be referred to the civil judiciary. He stressed that the oral court is the one that issued the ruling and is responsible for implementing the penalties issued, and that thus there is no risk of violating any constitutional guarantee. For this reason, Baez’s request to have the case sent to the “Money Road K” court was also not granted.
Finally, the judge noted that, as the oral court had ordered, it was necessary to prove the connection between the property to be seized and the benefit of the illegal business. Borinski joined the Hornos vote.