The arguments of the verdict of the judgment of the call Cause Road they left cloth to cut in several aspects: from the admission of the lack of direct evidence to link Cristina Kirchner to the “wrong hypothesis” that the judges foisted on the prosecutors. But another, not minor, was that the Court advised that it will send a report to the Bar Association of the City of Buenos Aires so that the “reckless professional interventions” of defenders are controlledamong them of Carlos Beraldi.
“I think they didn’t like that we told them they were the Lawfare Court”said the vice president’s lawyer in statements to C5N when asked regarding the matter.
In the operative part of the sentence known last week, the judges Jorge Gorini, Andres Basso and Rodrigo Gimenez Uriburu They complained regarding the way in which the lawyers for the accused handled themselves during the course of the trial.
The judges ask to investigate the “reckless interventions” of Cristina Kirchner’s lawyers
In this line, they indicated that Law 23,187 that regulates the practice of the profession “imposes as a specific duty of the registration lawyers who intervene as parties in the process to behave with ‘loyalty, probity and good faith in professional performance’a commitment that on occasions was not fulfilled, as we stated on repeated occasions throughout this sentence”.
In effect, the judges asked the College to “monitor reckless professional interventions detailed throughout this document.
Given this, Beraldi, who headed with his colleague And Llernovoy The technical defense of the vice president, sentenced to 6 years in prison and perpetual disqualification from holding public office, maintained that “there is no problem.” And she added: “If the records do not arrive voluntarily, I will appear before the Bar Association because I think I do my job and quite well“.
Rusconi, angry with the Court
Who also did not like the Court’s attitude went to Maximilian Rusconidefense attorney for Julio De Vido, former Minister of Federal Planning. At least that’s how it emerges from an interview in which he stated that they are judges who “They have not respected the precedents in Argentine judicial history to make nonsense.”
From “wrong hypothesis” to “proven fact”: the differences between judges and prosecutors in sentencing CFK
“If we lawyers have to criticize ourselves in something, it is for having been so condescending in such a hostile scenario, at least formally. We have always maintained the style, we are lawyers with a lot of experience used to playing on inclined courts“, he claimed.
During an interview in AM 750 He complained that the judges attended the Bar Association when it was the defense attorneys themselves who summoned observers from the institution “following they canceled the microphones in an oral trial.” He attributed this attitude to “a show of power.”
Asked regarding the Court’s reasons for making that determination, Rusconi said that “they did not like that we use some type of defense linked to what is called Lawfarebut the defenses have the right to use the criminal legal or political argument they consider that they have to use.”
And he wondered: “Am I going to have to ask these three people for permission to define my defensive line?”. He replied that “the day I feel that I have to do that, I will no longer dedicate myself to the profession.”
AS/fl
You may also like
