The text of the indictment of Fernando Sabag and Brenda Uliarte raises a controversy: Judge María Eugenia Capuchetti does not make any political approach, that is, she takes the case as if it were just another police case and not an attack on democracy, on the Constitution, a attempt to destabilize the country. And the reality is that it was an attempt to kill the Vice President of Argentina and one of the most important political figures in the country.. There is a fact that highlights what happened even more: the double standard. Every day Commodore Py uses the figure of the illicit association against former officials of the Kirchner government.
That crime, which is in the chapter of Public Order of the Penal Code and that it was used to repress unions and armed organizations, Cristina is accused, for example, in the case of the Santa Cruz public works. But in this case, which was indeed an attempted murder to destabilize public order and in which at least four people were involved, it was not used. Likewise, almost all criminal lawyers reject the existence of this crime in the Argentine Penal Code. But neither did the judge resort to crimes against the Constitution.
Page 12 He consulted different lawyers, criminal lawyers and first-level constitutionalists, so that they could contribute their views.
Former member of the Supreme Court, Raul Eugenio Zaffaronimaintained -rather in agreement with Capuchetti- that “there is a clear attempted murder and that is enough. The motivations and possible consequences of the act are things that must be taken into account for the graduation of guilt and punishment, that is, to increase the punishment within the legal scale.. Homicide has a sentence of 8 to 25 years, the scale of the attempt can reach 12 and a half years and even more depending on the calculation or interpretation of the formula (it can be 18 years and something). I do not believe that in the case of the attempted homicide of a neighbor that maximum applies. If we move within the legal scale, there is no need to invent anything in the style of Bonadio’s creativity, which then ends up being applied to progressive sectors”.
The double rod of Commodore Py
Andres Gil Dominguezconstitutionalist, performs the framing and mentions the question of the double standard. “In the assassination attempt against the vice president that is being investigated in Justice, with the information that one has so far, it does not seem that the conduct developed by the authors fits into an armed uprising to change the Constitution or depose a power. public or prevent or impede the exercise of constitutional powers. That is why I believe that, up to now, it would not fit into the criminal types of attack on the constitutional order. There is something that perhaps allows us to reflect: there are four people involved with different degrees of authorship and participation. And yet, even in this case, the concept of illicit association was not applied. It is important, in comparative terms, what happens in the trial of the Vice President for the Vialidad case. In this case there is a gang of more than three people who got together to commit a crime and it does not apply, much less could it be applied in the Road process”.
One of the two lawyers of Cristina Kirchner in the file of the attempted murder, Jose Manuel Ubeiraexplained in let’s do something with this, on Radio 990, that “qualifications in the criminal sphere are resolved in the allegations. We’re a million miles away. But here there is a very marked component of illicit association, which is a figure that I detest, but it is in the Penal Code with some meaning and reason. It is a crime against public tranquility. Regardless of the specific fact that the attack against the Vice President was, the behavior of these people was intended to disturb public order. They also seem to be linked to unspecified crimes: they can do anything, attack the economy minister’s car, a torchlight march, the body bags, the scaffolds. That is the second characteristic of illicit association. Then, because of the way they are working, there is a degree of permanence. Carrizo looks minimally like an organizer. We want to find out who is the head of this structure. This is why the figure of the illicit association can get to walk”.
Questions without answers
For Maximilian Rusconi, a well-known criminal lawyer, “that in a prosecuting decision referring to an aggravated attempted murder of a political figure of the stature of the Vice President, in an obvious context of political violence promoted by some political and institutional sectors, the problem has been focused in a radius of ten meters around the victim of the attack, is again unpublished. It is very worrying and it is criticizable that not even specific lines of investigation have been captured, in a resolution of almost 100 pages, that they express the need to clarify the political motivation behind this group of people, individuals who undoubtedly spent 100 percent of their time planning the attack in detail and who undoubtedly received financial support. Unfortunately, the federal criminal judiciary based in the city of Buenos Aires, some of its members, to be credible, have to overact an objective, broad investigation, with a gender perspective, sensitive to the great possibility that there is a discourse of hatred generated by the climate (or the plan?) that has surrounded this attack. Today, this type of reductionism does not sound credible. Who was the first instigator of the fact? Who has provided all the logistical support? Who has financed? Who benefited from the fact? Lots of questions and hardly any answers.
Miguel Angel Pierrealso a well-known criminal lawyer, wonders “should the acting judge potentially consider, in order to evaluate the all factualpossible political threads? If the magistrate understands that the causal event is a domestic crime, no. If she understands that we are facing an organized crime scene, an act of terrorism, without a doubt, yes. The criminal actions of those who have been warned and are currently being prosecuted clearly respond to the actions of a primary, emerging and operationally dependent cell of an organization that provides logistics, assists and covers up other actors. The gross and suspected cleaning of a strategic cell phone must be urgently clarified. That fatally wounded a vital part of the investigation. It is surprising that at the dawn of the charged decision-making process, the judge has taken pains to liven up any political connection.”