For the judges, the six years in prison for CFK are little because of his “colossal political power” and “sumptuous scams”

The Vice President of the Nation Cristina Kirchner He was sentenced to six years in prison for the public works case in Santa Cruz. But for the judges who issued it “not even the maximum of the scale provided for the offense of aggravated fraudulent administration It turns out to be sufficient and adjusted to the degree of guilt that emerges from the judgment of reproach..

For the court, this sentence is not enough to punish what they described as “gross disappointment” to the State in the public works that the businessman Lázaro Báez received and for “colossal political power”, which Cristina Kirchner had during her two terms as President of the Nation, which put her in a position to prevent the crime from being committed. The magistrates also considered that because of his economic situation (“it should be noted that he was a person with high purchasing power”) “He didn’t find himself in the need to act the way he did.”

The offense of aggravated fraudulent administration carries a maximum sentence of six years in prison and judges cannot go beyond what is established in the Penal Code. In a special 1,616-page fundamentals section they released today, judges Jorge Gorini, Rodrigo Gimenez Uriburu and Andrew Basso They explained why they gave the vice president the maximum sentence for this crime.

You may be interested: The arguments of the sentence: for the judges, CFK created “a Trojan horse” to hide corruption in public works

“Cristina Elisabet Fernández de Kirchner, as head of the national executive power and by constitutional mandate supreme head of the nation, head of government and political head of the general administration of the country, had a fundamental intervention for the concretization of the crime” , was the first point they analyzed.

In the fundamentals, they explained that as president, she issued a decree that allowed the National Highway Directorate mappendix at the discretion of the funds Báez has received and that during this time, the businessman was doing business with hotels and properties of the Kirchner family.

“The tenor of his contributions to the lavish fraud committed, the preponderant scope it occupied to make the decisions essential to its execution, the unprecedented power it enjoyed to influence every corner of the state which interfered with the plan. The aforementioned self-interest that underpinned all the mechanisms put in place for the embezzlement of public funds, constitutes the structure that allows us to conclude that his conduct was what represented the higher level of devaluation due to the fact in general“, explained the judges when placing the vice-president as the person most responsible for the maneuver.

You may be interested: The court refuted Cristina Kirchner’s “lawfare” hypothesis: “Conspiracy theories and clichés”

So for the court “Not even the maximum of the scale provided for the offense of aggravated fraudulent administration proves to be sufficient and adjusted to the degree of guilt which emerges from the trial of the reproach.” “And the impact of minimal possibly mitigating circumstances, stemming from his personal conditions (for example, his lack of convictions), does not present an exception capable of neutralizing the seriousness of what was analyzed,” they added.

“On the contrary, as appears from his personality file, he is a 70-year-old, law graduate, with no relevant criminal record, who worked from an early age at the labor level, occupied various political positions elected for more than thirty years and has twice acceded to the highest constitutionally recognized office in our country: the Presidency of the Nation. In terms of wealth, living conditions, fixed income and other economic considerations, it can be seen that he was a person with high purchasing power and therefore, from this point of view, his scope of self-determination did not need to be done like him.” explained the judges.

And they add: “These socio-economic conditions, the level of family support that he records, his high professional training, his extensive career as a representative of some of the constituted powers and, above all, the colossal political power (with its economic and media projection) which he enjoyed during the investigation period, show the ample ability he had to motivate himself and adjust his behavior to compliance with the norm (which was expected given the role he occupied) For all the above, we consider that the sanction to be imposed on Fernández de Kirchner cannot be other than the maximum established for the crime committed, that is to say a 6-year prison sentence”.

I continued to read: