The ex-president Mauricio Macri insists on considering himself a victim of persecution in the case in which he is being investigated for illegal spying on the relatives of the crew members of the ARA San Juan and points against the biased performance of the judge Martín Bava. On the contrary, the defense of families of victims deepens support for the magistrate and points against the proposals of the ex-presidents.
Luis Tagliapietra, a lawyer and father of one of the crew members who died in the sinking of the submarine ARA San Juan, said this Sunday that the surrogate judge of Dolores acts with “great integrity” in the case. «Up to this moment Martín Bava has developed very neatly and with great probity«, He evaluated in statements to ‘One of these days’ by Radio Rivadavia.
In this way, the lawyer rejected the idea that the judge acts with partiality to harm Juntos por el Cambio in the run-up to the legislative elections. «This idea was introduced by the hegemonic media in an absolutely invasive way, with press releases and with questions that have nothing to do with it, because this investigation has been going on for more than a year, we have asked for the Macri investigation almost a year ago“, he claimed.
On the other hand, he referred to the suspension of the hearing agreed for last Thursday after Pablo Lanusse, Macri’s lawyer, formally requested to suspend the postponement until his client’s duty to keep secret on intelligence matters was lifted. “I feel from the legal point of view that we have to take into account that this is a leading case which means that it is a unique case that today is going to be jurisprudence,” he explained about the twists and turns in the case.
“There is no precedent in our country that a president, who is obviously the highest authority of the AFI (Federal Intelligence Agency), is charged with this type of crime, therefore there is a doctrinal discussion (…) that was generated all these days “, argument. At the same time, it was asked whether an accused former president should be relieved of state secrecy and asserted that it is something “very debatable.”