If anyone believed that Cuaderno’s case had acquired some significance Passport photo formatwhere only a face is shown in minimal proportions because he made a mistake. This chronicler, like many others, theorized that there would be at least a measure of decency. But it wasn’t like thatYo.
At the last hearing Juan Manuel Abal Medina’s naked torso flooded the screen. A walk with the camera open and a close-up of a Nordic white of the former chief of staff rounded off the session. A month after its launch on Zoom, there is no longer even an opportunity to show one’s face in what is paradigmatically the most important corruption trial in modern Argentina.
The former official’s pecs immediately became a trend on social networks. And it was the accused exhibitionist himself who provided an explanation. “Dear Sir or Madam, I share the note we submitted to the court about the Panzagate” from last Friday.he wrote in a text delivering the court presentation.
Below you will find their explanations. “Various media outlets have attributed this alleged personal images during the debate“In order to highlight a non-existent reckless act on my part, I would like to make it clear to the court in any case and with the excuse of the case that the moment intended to be maliciously reproduced corresponds to circumstances well before the start of the hearing,” he explains.
Abal Medina says that this high school “It is considered reserved and without public access as a result of the Court’s request to join in an hour early to cooperate with the start of daily sessions.”
According to the document presented by the white-chested man, he was in his private home waiting for the connection and the “registration and identity verification,” which he describes as “mere procedural requirements before the start of the trial via Zoom.” Finally, the final explanations: “I acted under the full belief that my computer camera was turned off and that no recording or recording was taking place at all.”he wrote in the court document titled “Let it be known.”
He “Panzagate” or “Pectoralesgate”Depending on where you look when watching the video, it’s another example of the special forms of a process that few others have expected. This is a disregard for the legal formality and exemplary nature of a process. that, unlike the vast majority of previous events, It judges not a case of corruption, but a system that Argentina has produced in which government favors were paid for with bags full of money.
This petty impunity that spread through the basements of glass-clad buildings It is what should be in the dock now. Oral speech and the forms of criminal proceedings are not for television, but for those who have nothing to do with it, to protest their innocence and for the guilty to get what they deserve. But In this case, beyond the condemnations, Argentina should strive for a transparent and clear government contract systemwhich sets a precise limit on the behavior of the officers who come and does not leave everything to the good behavior or morals of the contractor who holds the position.
The Cuaderno case has become a place for those convicted to remain hidden in the face of a society that does not demand convictions, but wants to know what happened and, above all, how business with the state will continue from now on.
The defendants look like a television station logo, sitting in a lost corner of the screen so that it never appears in the frame. Julio De Vido swallows in front of the camera – to the dismay of an open-mouthed protocol specialist – and a Businessman showing off the cleanliness of his sheets while frolicking in his bed. They laugh, they put the computer away, the lawyers pose while they solve other tasks and many defendants
Roberto Barattathe former official who was responsible for the driver’s trips Oscar Centenountil recently He walked through the Mapuche country with the anklet on his bicycle, without shame and without greeting anyone. And there are many who have seen it dozens of times in the supermarkets in the Pilar area.
During the hearings, dozens of medical certificates are issued to exempt defendants from even appearing on the virtual screen. At least if the shirtless option becomes official, perhaps leaving their small room to enjoy the pool will be a good deal for them.
On Tuesday, when you come back from the long weekend, The famous AMIA room, with a capacity for just over 200 people and located in the heart of Comodoro Py, will now be available. But there’s no point, it will continue on Zoom. The hearing is scheduled for 1:30 p.m. when the Zoom is turned on and another evening begins where at least everyone should be dressed.
There is a not insignificant problem: The oral court in the Cuadernos case will take place in the Court Palace and not in the Retiro building. It is said in the corridors of the federal judiciary that the judges refuse to move to Comodoro Py and give up their offices, and that is why they have urgently asked about the room in which the committees were decided 40 years ago, which happens to be in the palace. But, Incomprehensibly, everything will take place via Zoom on Tuesday.
The Caudernos matter is on its way to becoming a boomerang for Argentine institutions. It is a format in which there are no defendants in the dock, but hidden characters connected to a Zoom. From the bed, from the car, from 10 meters away behind the camera or with a naked torso in the preview. There is no commitment to any form that, for example, other countries use for paradigmatic processes such as: Mani Pulite in Italy, Lava Jato in Brazil or the trial of Alberto Fujimori in Peruto name just a few obvious and well-known cases.
In 21st century Argentina, after six years in court, it was not possible to adapt a room, even though it had been known for months when the trial would begin.. The main auditorium of the Palacio de la Libertad (exCCK), the Tecnópolis Convention Center, the Cervantes National Theater and the Jorge Luis Borges Auditorium of the National Library (with a capacity for 200 people) are some of the government locations that could have been used to conduct the trial.
And if, for example, they knocked on the door of the city administration, dozens of rooms would appear in the Theater or the San Martín Cultural Center or the auditorium in front of the Law Faculty.
He The negative impact of the Cuadernos case is becoming apparentAt least if the forms are maintained, they could become a threat to the rule of law, not because of citizen disobedience, but because of institutional decay itself.
When Judges, public prosecutors and supervisory bodies forego impartiality, transparency and respectful treatment, and legal authority is stripped of its content. The law ceases to be a collective mandate and becomes the will of the official on duty. And when people realize that the rules are no longer clear and the same for everyone, legitimacy – the invisible foundation that sustains obedience – collapses. Coercion may increase, but respect does not return: without procedural justice, no institution retains its authority. What falls is no longer a norm, but rather the public trust that maintains the cohesion of a society.
Argentine society is gradually becoming accustomed to spectacles like this case, which is beginning to be seen as a ditch to conceal and blur the facts. Any reader who has to be on Zoom twice a week will be wondering what to do with their work, with their obligations. But no defendant has this problem, as if the need to work after completing public service no longer exists.
If a trial is transitioned to Zoom, lJustice loses part of its liturgy and thus a central part of his authority: the public perception that the process is serious, controlled and celebratory. Virtuality dilutes hierarchies, disorganizes behavior, and enables scenes that would never occur in a physical courtroom: defendants hiding from the camera, lawyers calling in from cars, trivial interruptions, childish excuses, and behavior that would be impossible in court.
It’s not about technology, it’s about credibility. A judgment intended to convey rigor ends up looking like a video call. AND When the judiciary is not distinguished from a domestic assembly, the idea of legal authority collapses.
About The Author
